Categoría: Previous Issues Articles

The UN’s shipping body, the International Maritime Organization, had a mixed meeting last month. Where does this now leave the sector’s pledge to act? The IMO met to discuss air quality, as well as GHG emissions, but how does this level up from agreements made in Paris? We saw long awaited action on air quality, but it is disappointing that Parties couldn’t show equal ambition when it came to shipping’s climate impact.

The key issue at stake was whether the sector—with a CO₂ impact greater than Germany—will pull together an emissions target in time for the 2018 facilitative dialogue. One proposal was to set a provisional target, and then update it when more data became available. But we are currently going down with this ship.

Following huge opposition from a group of member states and the industry, the IMO eventually settled for an “IMO Strategy” document to be developed and submitted to COP24. Under the agreed roadmap, the strategy includes neither a provisional target nor clear emission pathways and measures for international shipping. Rather it looks to short-medium-long term efficiency opportunities for international shipping. This is a euphemism for no action at least for the next 7 years, and a certainty of no wind in its sails.
... Read more ...

There’s a simple truth for what’s needed in technology transfer at COP22. Here are some suggestions on how to make it so:

1. The massive scale of technology deployment that is needed to meet the 1.5°C goal with pre and post 2020 action requires that the Climate Technology Centre and Network, the operational arm of the Technology Mechanism, is ready for a sharply rising influx of country requests. The CTCN needs to use its resources wisely, for example, by improving the transparency of its funding, and by prioritising the Network provider of services, by the member with the most closely-related experience and reasonable, but not necessarily lowest cost.  Quality and local knowledge do matter. Add the periodic assessment of the TM and a solid draft for the Technology Framework for a winning combination.

2. We need to create a “Stakeholder Cooperative Technology Assessment Space” to take a hard look at both the co-benefits and risks of projects, particularly “unknown” or “unknowable” negative impacts when a technology is untested or can only be properly tested in the open atmosphere or ocean.

Cooperative Technology Assessment engages all stakeholders and endeavours to answer a range of questions:

1. How do we know which technologies’ emission reductions and/or increased resilience/co-benefits are worth the risk that they might pose?
... Read more ...

Loss and damage (L&D) has earned its place in the climate change playbook, alongside adaptation and mitigation. With its own stand-alone article (8!), as well as a commitment that there will be international support for loss and damage, COP22 can boldly go where no COP has gone before.

And bold steps are sorely needed. Despite having “action and support” in its mandate since 2013, the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) has not yet even come close to  delivering bold actions to protect vulnerable people. The WIM framework for a 5-year plan is a good starting point, but needs political rocket-fuel to deliver real benefits in the near term. ECO applauds the WIM ExCom for listing finance as their top priority. However, we wonder how finance for L&D will be scaled up if the WIM’s current framework only contains a “placeholder” for finance. Loss and damage will need significant finance separate from adaptation finance. The first logical step would be for the WIM and the SCF to work out how much finance is required, and to put an appropriate strategy in place to raise the necessary funds. This plan has to also consider innovative sources. Levies from aviation and fossil fuel sales could provide a significant, predictable source of finance that need not come from taxpayer contributions.
... Read more ...

After much anticipation, a few weeks ago the long-awaited “Roadmap to US$100 billion”  was finally released by 21 developed countries. The plain white cover of the report led ECO to hope the report’s authors were saving money on design to meet their commitments made back in Copenhagen and Cancun!

ECO’s hopes were only half met by what was inside the drab exterior. Last year’s OECD/CPI report claimed that these countries had delivered $62 billion in climate finance in 2014. The “Roadmap” that has been tabled this year is a bit more carefully worded, but still fails to give sufficient direction and impetus to spur further discussion on climate finance.

ECO has some suggestions for what a climate finance roadmap should look like to secure an outcome that would give all Parties clarity and confidence. At COP22 Parties need to work together to clarify:

• An adequate scale-up of adaptation finance
• Which portion of counted climate finance will be grants or grant equivalent
• How the most vulnerable countries are being prioritised
• Climate finance that will be provided by 2020 (for those countries that have not submitted any INDCs)
• The role developed nations foresee for private capital
• Work on how to provide loss and damage finance, over and above $100bn

Country parties should use the current negotiations about modalities of climate finance accounting under the SBSTA to agree on a common, clear methodology that would ensure transparency and accountability.

There’s an elephant in the room at COP22. While the Paris Agreement sets ambitions, goals and a common cause for the planet, there is major concern with respect to the level of ambition in the NDCs. Ramping up ambition of the current NDCs is something everyone knows we have to address. So, let’s talk about it, shall we?

Last year, we agreed to a facilitative dialogue to ratchet up ambition in 2018. We have to get this right, otherwise we will not just have elephants but an entire savannah of weighty issues unaddressed. If NDCs are not increased around 2018, we will be stuck with inadequate targets until 2030, seriously jeopardising our ability to achieve Paris’s essential temperature goals. If the main outcome of the dialogue is just another recognition of the huge gap between current commitments and what must be done to cut emissions to stay below 1.5°C, we will have failed. We have to face the elephant and deal with the issue directly.

However, there isn’t a clear agenda item at COP22  to discuss this 2018 moment. The Paris decisions rightly recognise the importance of scaling up climate change efforts, but fail to provide direction on how country efforts should be increased over time.
... Read more ...

Hey Teacher! Capacity building is the missing brick in the wall. For the Paris Agreement to be truly universal, effective capacity building is critical to enable developing countries to facilitate fulfilment of their new requirements and transition towards decarbonised and climate-resilient economies.

That’s why Article 11 matters. It stems from the recognition that the “business as usual” approach to capacity-building does not work. We can no longer measure effectiveness by relying on international consultants to fly into a developing country, conduct a workshop and fly out again. Article 11 acknowledges that capacity-building is a process. To be sustainable, it requires a longer-term and integrated approach, one that mobilises and strengthens national institutions in developing countries, such as universities, think-tanks and private companies.

The Paris Agreement set up the Paris Committee on Capacity Building (PCCB) to be up and running by the end of COP22. That should foster a much needed paradigm shift from short-term to long-term mobilisation and building-up of national capacity. If allowed the PCCB will develop a more detailed roadmap to support country efforts to fill their policy, institutional and technological roles. In turn, it will promote best practices and lesson-sharing, encourage ownership, enhance cooperation (north-south, south-north, south-south and triangular), as well as instituting better monitoring. So all in all, maybe not just another brick in the wall.

The countdown to COP22 will intensify at the Ministers meeting on 17 October intended to clarify key issues before the conference. The incoming Moroccan presidency and outgoing French presidency have prepared a handy Q&A for Ministers to come prepared to the meeting. ECO has answered the most relevant questions for you exclusively in this issue of ECO.

Mobilisation of means of implementation 

1) What to expect for the roadmap towards the USD 100 billion? 

Like all good financial tools and plans, the roadmap needs to have clarity and predictability. It needs to provide an accurate and detailed forward-looking account of how the US$100 billion will be mobilised in addition to the existing efforts being made. This should include the types of instruments, sources, channels, etc. as well as public-private leverage ratios. ECO has said it dozens of times: greater clarity on financial support to mitigation and adaptation will generate confidence in developing country Parties. It will also showcase the amount of finance flowing in the coming years by 2020 which will help developing countries integrate NDCs into their planning and implementation. Of particular note would be building on the OECD’s 2015 report on progress towards the $100 billion goal. This means grants should be reported at face value and present net positive flows into developing countries.
... Read more ...

October started with a real bustle of activity! This month, the Paris Agreement became one of the most swiftly ratified international treaties in history as it crossed the second of two thresholds required to enter into force, which will now occur on 4 November 2016. Expedited action by the European Union and seven of its member states (Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Portugal and Slovakia) as well as Bolivia, Canada and Nepal ensured that the global community sailed past the Agreement’s emissions threshold.

Since the Paris Agreement opened for signature on 22 April, ratification has occurred at a breakneck speed. In just 5 short months, 73 countries representing nearly 57% of global emissions have joined the Paris Agreement, signalling their intent to continue the spirit of Paris and work together to address climate change.

The Agreement further provides that the first meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement referred to as CMA1—we can never get enough acronyms—will be held in conjunction with the next COP, next month in Marrakech.

This will be a significant for a number of reasons. CMA1 will be the first meeting of the governing body, which has authority over all substantive, procedural, administrative and operational matters.
... Read more ...

As we approach the yearly Pre-COP and COP feast, this time with a Moroccan flavour, here is how working in other fora can strengthen ambition and action in the UNFCCC. With ICAO, Montreal Protocol, G20, and not to mention all of the synergies with the SDGs there is so much more on the menu. In this brave new world of implementation and global action, the emphasis must not only be on the ingredients of the tajine, but also what you serve it with. ECO has 5 serving suggestions

A handful of HFCs:

Like giving up sugar, it’s hard to go cold turkey on HFCs. However, ECO hopes for a Kigali special this October that finally kicks the HFCs habit. All that’s needed is Montreal Protocol Parties to adopt an ambitious amendment to phase-down HFCs and improve energy efficiency. The most scientific chefs estimate a phase down of these potent greenhouse gases could avoid more than 100 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2050 which is equal to about 0.5ºC of warming.

An ounce of aviation:

At its recently concluded 39th Assembly in Montreal, the International Civil Aviation Organisation has reached the world’s first agreement to limit emissions from international aviation—a deal that will be voluntary until 2027.
... Read more ...

Paris provided hope and momentum. It was a giant leap forward, providing the world with an international framework to address climate challenges. If COP22 can build on this momentum, and fully maximise the gains of COP21, we might indeed make real progress!

COP21 had shortcomings, though. It does not provide the necessary ambition required to fulfil the objectives of the Agreement itself. The ambition showcased by countries within their INDCs does not reflect the stated objectives of the Agreement: to hold warming to well below 2°C and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C. ECO wonders if countries will now put their heads in the sand and point to the 5-year-cycles? Or recognise the inadequacy of their current INDCs and ramp up their ambition so as to ensure that the Paris Agreement’s objectives articulated in Article 2 are fulfilled?

Facilitating and enabling faster implementation. along with ensuring urgency for greater ambition, should be COP22’s cornerstone. Short-term ambition needs to be increased and acted on. COP22 has the potential to set a precedent for the 2018 facilitative dialogue and its successful outcomes. Rather than finger pointing, or just reiterating existing institutional inadequacies, the focus of discussions should be on capturing and incentivising over-achievement by countries in the pre-2020 period, ensuring that institutions within the UNFCCC account for the needs of countries, as suggested at various technical expert meetings (TEMs).
... Read more ...