As Lima enters the end game, ECO stresses that the INDCs and the associated upfront
information requirements are at the core of the COP20 decision. The minimum expectation of a Lima outcome (based on the core of the Warsaw mandate) is a requirement of solid information provided when the INDCs are communicated. This needs to go hand in hand with the decision on INDC scope and assessment. Let’s look in turn at these three parts of the INDCs.
The scope of the INDCs is at serious risk of being unbalanced. Mitigation and finance are the absolute must-have elements, but also Parties that want to put forward information about their adaptation activities should be encouraged to do so. And Parties’ fair share should be considered as the sums of domestic action and provision of support.
Assessments of INDCs need to be structured so that Parties do not feel they are being asked for more than their fair share, or that others are not doing so.
Therefore, it is essential that the assessment is of the individual equity of the INDCs, along with assessment of the aggregate effort. Furthermore, assessment will be fair only if it is based on the principles of adequacy,
CBDR+RC and equitable access to sustainable development.
The assessment phase before Paris depends on the timely availability of the necessary information. That means many months before COP21. Thus, up-front information requirements must at least include details about the type of mitigation targets, their base year, and so on.
Further, information should be included on quantified financial support for mitigation,
adaptation, capacity building, scale of support, timeframe of support, and more. Parties will also need to provide information supporting claims that their INDCs are, indeed, an equitable contribution toward the global effort.
And now, Parties, we need your information.
