Presentation on theme: "EuropeAid 1 Climate Change: from Copenhagen to Cancun Hot Issues training seminar 14 July, Brussels."— Presentation transcript:
EuropeAid 1 Climate Change: from Copenhagen to Cancun Hot Issues training seminar 14 July, Brussels
EuropeAid 2 What is the problem with CC negotiations? US requesting equal treatment of BASICs Annex Bs want US and BASICs on board (competetiveness) DC: only outcome is amendment of Annex B for KP and set of COP decisions on rest = need to balance demands for equal OR differentiated treatment between 3 key players: US, BASIC and KP Annex B
EuropeAid 3 What is the problem with CC negotiations? (Cont) Bali « solution » on future negotiations: introduction of 2 distinct negotiation tracks: AWG-LCA and AWG-KP AWG-KP: discussions around further reductions AWG-LCA: mitigation goals, shared vision for adaptation, mitigation, technology and finance. Bali road map: COP decides to launch process to enable implementation of the Convention through long term cooperative action in order to reach an agreed outcome by addressing actions on mitigation of CC including 1.b.i Measurable, reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation commitments, including quantified emission limitation and reduction objectives by all developed countries… 1.b.ii NAMAs by DC…in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner
EuropeAid 4 What is the problem with CC negotiations? (Cont) CPH « problem »: how to link at the end of the process again both tracks? What outcome of the LCA track: what means « an agreed outcome »: legally binding? Complementing, replacing KP? It became an « Accord » EU position: preference for one (combined) track but willing to continue with KP track as long as there is guarantee that « environmental integrity » of the Convention is safeguarded. So need for US and BASICs to agree in one way or another to verifiable reductions. Cancun: ??
EuropeAid 5 The game and the players uncovered The EU – leadership in question: Ambushed or dignified? One Voice? Complexities relating to 27+1 Lisbon Treaty an opportunity to re-assess EUs way of operating in international negotiations US – handicapped by domestic constraints BASIC – no compromise to growth G77 – severe internal identity issues AOSIS – right to exist ALBA - Bolivarian Alliance of Americas – resistance to capitalism? Saudi Arabia – compensation for future losses?
EuropeAid 6 The Copenhagen Accord… Includes many positive elements, e.g. gives basis for GHG emission reduction commitments, MRV, technology mechanism, the fight against deforestation, and financing Fast-start funding : about 21 billion - EU contribution 7.2 billion. Long term financial needs around 73 billion per year from All major emitters (US, China, India, Brazil,..) onboard for the first time 55 Parties with 78% of global emission associate with the CPH Accord by 31 Jan. Annex I: reiterate pledges on the table at COP15 (with the exception of Canada – lower target!); Non-Annex I: important players submitted NAMAs
EuropeAid 7 But falls short on key aspects… Not legally binding Neither agreed process leading legally binding instrument No ambitious environmental outcome (no timing for peaking nor 2050 ambition levels) Not sufficient mitigation pledges to meet the 2° Celsius objective
EuropeAid 8 What lies ahead? UNFCCC negotiation time? Procedural meeting in Bonn in April, AWG-LCA 9 and AWG-KP 11 in June, ? More discussion early Aug in Bonn; China in Oct? COP16 in November in Cancun. A single legally binding outcome: By COP16 in Mexico or rather in 2011 in SA? Simple continuation of the Kyoto Protocol is not an option Outcome US legislative debate … ? Positioning of the ALBA countries (Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Cuba) Other informal processes could remain important, e.g. G20, G8, Major Economies Forum
EuropeAid 9 What about agriculture? What is the issue? General agreement that contribution of all sectors will be needed if T° increase to stay below 2°C, incl agriculture Agriculture offers options for mitigation, adaptation, development and food security Agriculture already part of negotiation process: o AWG-KP: LULUCF accounting rules for Annex I countries o CDM: reforestation projects are eligible; o Main problem = establishment of baseline and accounting rules and related costs: problems relted to additionality, verification, leakage, permanence and scale
EuropeAid 10 What to expect from Cancun? CDM: expansion of scope under discussion (cropland- wetland- grazing land management, soil carbon management…) Proposal to set up a work programme on agriculture (in DC) under SBSTA to be launched in Cancun Diverse views on the content of future work on agriculture (food sovereignty…) Resistance from G77 &China to engage in practical work before Cancun – fear to prejudge outcome of AWG-LCA negotiations The road to an effective integration of agriculture in UNFCCC is still long!
EuropeAid 11 Does this mean « wait and see » for us dealing with project preparation? NO: look for win-win options, mainly in adaptation: Further research and data gathering is a must Sustainable land use management: land and water conserving techniques « vertical » agriculturual expansion rather than « horizontal »: intensification (but without incr emissions) Crop diversification and drought resistance Mainstreaming of environment and CC in aid cooperation projects and programmes
EuropeAid 12 Fast start climate change finance… Climate change finance to be new and additional Fast-start funding : about 21 billion EU pledge and position: o 7.2 bn, for mitigation and adaptation (inc. technology) o Provide a first report on its fast start by June 2010 in Bonn o All MS are to contribute – but still planning individual allocations o Existing initiatives will play key role to avoid delays Other developed countries put forward their pledges, and started providing information – e.g. US (about 1.3 and 1.8bn US$ for 2010 and 2011 respectively in grants)
EuropeAid 13 EU priorities for fast start climate change finance Three key areas: o Adaptation: increase knowledge base; integration; implementation of urgent action, DRR o Mitigation: capacity building for LEDS and MRV; carbon market; REDD readiness o Technology cooperation, to support action on mitigation and adaptation, through capacity building and pilot projects
EuropeAid 14 The EC contribution uncovered EC pledged 150m over the three years 50m in 2010, equal split between mitigation and adaptation Adaptation: 25m for the Global Climate Change Alliance, bringing 2010 total to 49m Mitigation – work in progress, expected to cover: Low Emission Development Strategies (LEDS); monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV); REDD, Clean Carbon Technologies (including CCS) For 2011, open! But expect to maintain the balance and continue working on CB and paving the way for future financial flows