8/4/2019 ECO 4 - October 4th

1/2

CLIMATENEGOTIATIONSPANAMAOCTOBER11NGONEWSLETTER

ECOhasbeenpublishedbyNon-GovernmentalEnvironmentalGroupsatmajorinterna:onalconferencessincetheStockholmEnvironment

Conferencein1972.ECOisproducedco-opera:velybytheClimateAc:onNetworkattheUNFCCCmee:ngsinPanama,October2011.

ECOemailadministra:on@climatenetwork.orgECOwebsitehp//climatenetwork.org/eco-newsleersEditorial/Produc:onJoshuaDarrach

4

October

TheAccoun

8/4/2019 ECO 4 - October 4th

2/2

CLIMATENEGOTIATIONSPANAMAOCTOBER11NGONEWSLETTER

ISSUENO4VOLUMECXXIXFREEOFCHARGE

work, such as guidelines for funding, on therecommendations of the AdaptationCommittee in order to ensure adherence tothe adaptation framework, and take intoconsideration the growing adaptationsciences and emerging issues.

This however does not mean that theCommittee should trespass into the corebusiness of the GCF Board (or otherinstitutions). A soft link will be a way toincrease the overall coherence which is sodemanded by everyone.

ECO suggests that negotiators reviewa recent study published by the EarthSystem Governance Project. It reviewedexperience from multilateral institutionsfrom a variety of areas with regard toparticipatory approaches and the inclusionof stakeholders in its governance structure.

Whilst ECO appreciates that thereseems to be convergence towards allowingobservers to attend the AdaptationCommittee meetings, the lessons learnedfrom this and other studies suggest thatadding representatives from stakeholderconstituencies to the governance structureof the Committee, either voting or non- voting, could add much needed expertise,insights and credibility to the work of theAdaptation Committee.

We surmise that this was also proposedby some Parties in the negotiations. Thereis no doubt that stakeholder constituencieswould have to ensure appropriaterepresentation from developing countriescombined with adequate expertise. Now isthe time to put the Adaptation Committeeon the right track, to be ambitious and toconverge as soon as possible.

! Side EventTuesday, October 4

16:30 - 18:00Miraflores (Sheraton Hotel)

Scaling-up Climate Financefrom 2013:

How to ensure sufficient and scalable long-term publicclimate finance starting in 2013, after the end of FSF.

CAN will discuss the need for new and additionalbudget contributions and assess options for mobilizingsupplementary sources of innovative public finance,

consistent with CBDR.

Speakers:Forum for Environment- Ethiopia (Mahlet Eyassu)

Oxfam International (Tim Gore)LDCs(Evans Davie Njewa, Malawi)

Paul Watkinson,France/EUMohamed Nasr, Africa Group

- Continued from Page 1, Column 3

Unlearned

Lessons After

Fukushima

ECO cannot stop wondering; whatwill it take to make Japan come to itssenses? Nuclear is neither safe norclean. If the ongoing, dreadful tragediesin Fukushima cannot make this simple factclear, what will it take?

And still, in the KP spin off groupmeeting yesterday, Japan, supported byIndia, once again refused to drop theoption to include nuclear in CDM. Thismeans the country still wants to get creditsfor exporting to developing countries the very technology that brought suchtremendous hardship upon its own people.

This is inappropriate, irresponsibleand even morally wrong.

The country still has not been able tostabilize the reactors and has not been able

to take care of the residents in the heavcontaminated areas, nor dispose r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e a r i s i n g f r odecontaminat ion and from wattreatment sludge.

How can Japan take this position the midst of the nuclear crisis?

Just as a reminder, this technolodoes not fit one of the objectives of CDMwhich is to contribute to sustainabdevelopment.

It is time for all Parties to make simple decision: drop the option to inclunuclear in CDM. The world expressgreat disapproval towards the Japaneposition of continuing to promote nuclein the aftermath of the Fukushimdisaster.

Since June, there has been muchattention paid to the topic of Annex Iaccounting. This has been reiterated in theopen session on mitigation.

There does seem to be someconvergence on the need for transparencyof assumptions underlying Annex Itargets. This is absolutely critical and inline with the provisions of the CancunAgreements. There is so much we dontknow about the pledges that have been putforward. What are the rules for LULUCFu n d e r l y i n g t h e p l e d g e s ? W h a tmethodologies for offsets are beingembraced? How is economy-wide beingdefined? What gases and sectors areincluded? How will double counting ofemissions reductions be avoided? Without

information on these and other issues, itwill be difficult, if not entirely impossible,to accurately assess the targets in theInternational Assessment and Review(IAR) process. This clarification processmust be formalized beyond the workshops.A first step would be for the Secretariat toupdate their technical paper on Annex Itargets, which came out in June this year.But furthermore, countries must be moreforthcoming about their assumptions and

this cannot be achieved without a moformal clarification process.

So what is the big deal arounaccounting? Cant Annex I countries ju

report what they are doing and be dowith it? Well, while transparency anclarification are vital they just are not goenough to ensure a robust internationclimate regime. Common accounting ruwill be necessary if emissions reductioare to be assessed in a comparable way key objective of the Cancun AgreemenIn addition, it will be very difficult inform the periodic review if we do nhave an accurate picture of emissioreductions. And last but not least, a lack common accounting rules could lead double counting of emissions reduction

confusion in the carbon markeincompleteness of coverage, and potentgaming. As the UNEP emissions gareport shows, accounting rules can direcaffect the amount of emissions reductioachieved in the 2013-2020 period.

We need to make sure that the IAprocess is not only about clarification which is vitally important but also abothe development of accounting rules. Tenvironmental integrity of the regimdepends upon it.

Annex I Accounting Not Just About

Transparency