eco 7 - 7th october

8/4/2019 ECO 7 - 7th October

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/eco-7-7th-october 1/4

CLIMATENEGOTIATIONSPANAMAOCTOBER’11NGONEWSLETTER

ECOhasbeenpublishedbyNon-GovernmentalEnvironmentalGroupsatmajorinterna:onalconferencessincetheStockholmEnvironment

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

ECOemailadministra:[email protected]–ECOwebsitehp//climatenetwork.org/eco-newsleers–Editorial/Produc:onJoshuaDarrach

7October

TheMaladyIssue

ISSUENO7VOLUMECXXIXFREEOFCHARGE

Getting the Durban

Deal DoneECO has been clear in its call for a

three-part outcome in Durban: adoptionof a strong second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol; a mandate fornegotiation of a more comprehensive andambitious longer-term climate regimebased on both scientific adequacy and theprinciple of common but differentiatedresponsibilities and respective capacities;and a package of decisions facilitating near-term action on all four building

blocks of the Bali Action Plan andi mp leme n ta t i o n o f the CancunAgreements.

Let’s make something else clear:building a long-term structure for fair andeffective international action on climatechange is important, but what reallymatters is meaningful action supporting peoples and communities already suffering the negative effects of climate change, andcollective emission reductions at the scaleand pace needed to avert even morecatastrophic impacts in the future. Thebest legally binding treaty instruments in

the world don’t amount to much withoutemission reduction ambition in line withthe science and financial resourcescommensurate with the need.

Coming out of Panama, there hasbeen some progress in developing drafttext on many of the elements of the BaliAction Plan and the Cancun Agreements.But the prospects for linked agreements onextension of the Kyoto Protocol and thenegotiations on a longer-term legally-

binding instrument are not bright, absentsignificant changes in the negotiating positions of a number of key countries.Let’s look at them in turn.

EU. Fair or not, the EU holds thekey to the Durban outcome. If the EUdoes not come to Durban with the cleargoal of adopting a second commitmentperiod (not some fuzzy polit icalcommitment) the Kyoto Protocol willwither and die. On Thursday, the EU laid

out a clear set of elements for negotiationsover the longer-term treaty that wouldassure that a KP second commitmentpe r i od i s a b r i dge t o a morecomprehensive and ambitious legalframework. EU environment ministersneed to be careful not to set overlystringent conditions for such negotiationswhen they meet next Monday inLuxembourg.

Australia and New Zealand.While the view from atop the fence is nice,these countries need to get off of it andmake clear they are ready to join with the

EU, Norway, and others in embracing asecond KP commitment period.

Japan, Russia, Canada. Thesecountries claim they are bailing out of Kyoto because it doesn’t cover a largeenough portion of global emissions. Theyneed to come to Durban prepared toreconsider their position if agreement canbe reached on launching negotiations on alonger-term treaty regime, or risk being

ECO is pleased to see the discussioon long-term finance in Panama finishinon a better note than they started. Tmany hours in Panama were lost developed countries pondered wheththere was a need to even discuss how mobilize the money they committed Cancun. At one stage one developcountry party even seemed to query whclimate finance was. Let’s hope all that is now water und

the bridge (or through the Panama canaYesterday the EU joined their partners AOSIS, the Africa Group, India and SauArabia in submitting text on long-terfinance. As ECO goes to press, there is nethat Japan and even the US are bringitheir own ideas to the table. That sounlike consensus on the need to negotiate package on long-term finance in DurbaThe homework countries face until then,what that package will contain.

Two upcoming meetings in thmeantime may give them some ideas. Firthe final session of the Transition

Committee will start to clarify the ambitiof the Green Climate Fund. Madeveloped countries have said they awaiting to hear more about the contours the fund being created before committinthe resources that will ensure it is not aempty shell. ECO hopes that the finmeeting will again capture the imaginatiof governments North and South. Tworld needs a new kind of fund to meet t

Finding the

Finance

- Continued on Page 2, Column 2 - Continued on Page 2, Column 1

http://climatenetwork.org/eco-newsletters

http://climatenetwork.org/eco-newsletters

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]




ISSUENO7VOLUMECXXIXPAGE2

perceived as multilateral treaty-killers, nottreaty-builders.

US. The one developed country thatstayed out of Kyoto, in part because theProtocol didn’t include major developing countries, claims it is willing to enter intonegotiations on a new legally-binding instrument. But it has set very stringentconditions for the launch of suchnegotiations, while acknowledging thatthese conditions almost guarantee noagreement on a negotiating mandate inDurban. Meanwhile, the US is struggling to meet its already inadequate emissionsreduction commitment, and has beenreluctant to discuss ways of meeting the$100 billion by 2020 annual climatefinance goal its president committed to inCopenhagen. At the very least, the USmust contribute to such discussions inDurban, not attempt to block them.

The LDCs and AOSIS. The moralpower of the most vulnerable countriesneeds to be heard, highlighting both theexistential crisis they face and thereprehensible failure of those responsiblefor the problem to face up to it. Thesegroups support both the extension of theKP and a mandate for negotiation of anew legally-binding instrument; they mustcontinue to work together in Durban toachieve both of these goals.

The BASIC countries. All four of these countries are leaders in taking

domestic actions to limit their emissiogrowth as their economies continue rapidly develop. Their leadership is alneeded on the current fight to preserverules-based multilateral climate trearegime. They should certainly continue demand a second Kyoto commitmeperiod. But they should also call the USbluff, by indicating their willingness negotiate a more comprehensive lonterm treaty regime including bindincommitments for all but the LeaDeveloped Countries, as long as it’s trubased on principles of equity anc o m m o n b u t d i f f e r e n t i a t eresponsibility.

All countries must come to Durbaprepared to negotiate in a spirit compromise if we are to achieve thambitious package of decisions needed address the mounting climate crisMinisters must take full advantage of thetime together before Durban, at both thpre-COP ministerial consultations and thlikely pre-Durban meeting of the MajEconomies Forum, to explore constructivsolutions to the current roadblocks to suca package of decisions. Then in Durbathey must work actively under thguidance of the South African presidento bring the deal home. Their citizeneed – and expect – nothing less.

- Continued from Page 1, Column 2

climate challenge and spur commitments atthe scale of resources needed.

Second, G20 finance ministers andleaders will discuss the report theyrequested from the World Bank and IMFon sources of long-term climate finance.The leaked preliminary report indicated anencouraging analysis of the potential toraise large sums from the internationalshipping sector, without hitting theeconomies of developing countries. ECOwas told the report will show that a $25 pertonne carbon price will increase the costs of global trade by just 0.2%, while generating around $25 billion per year. ECO wasparticularly pleased to hear that the WorldBank and IMF have found that it is possibleto compensate developing countries bydirecting a portion of these revenues tothem, ensuring they face no net incidence

as a result of these measures. That wouldbe a unique international solution to thehigh and rising emissions of a uniqueinternational sector.

ECO has never questioned thelegitimacy of the UNFCCC process to takethe final decisions on questions such assources of finance. But any responsiblecountry that is serious about generating thescale of resources so urgently needed – especially by the poorest countries – will notignore such strong evidence to help do that.

So ECO leaves Panama with cautiousoptimism on the finance track. Countries

have finally come together to negotiate text.With the inputs they will receive from theTransitional Committee meeting and theG20, there is every chance they can arrivein Durban ready to strike the real deal onlong-term finance that developing countriesneed.


Panama Canal: In traditional Panamaniandress, campaigners with the message Time to Act (Es

Hora de Actuar) highlighted options to tackling emissions

from international shipping – which are twice that of Australia and climbing – that were on the agenda at theUN climate talks in Panama. The talks are the last before

government ministers meet in Durban, South Africa for theannual climate summit (COP17) at the end of the year.

Advocacy organizations claimed establishing a price oncarbon pollution from shipping would both cut emissionsand help pay for the impacts of climate change that disproportionately hit poor countries.





Adapting for DurbanECO has noted that adaptation

negotiators have worked seriously to makedecent progress on the AdaptationCommittee in the last days here inPanama. The time for adding new text

suggestions should be over now. Partiesshould sort out differences, produce thenegotiating text and leave only the politicalissues to be tackled in Durban.

COP 17 taking place on African soil is just seven weeks away and ECO isprobably not the only one to note thatadaptation is crucial for the Africancontinent. Therefore insufficient progresson this issue would be an bad signal forAfrica and the whole world. In nocircumstances should adaptation be heldhostage by other issues and used as abargaining chip. The Durban conference

must advance the implementation of theCancun Adaptation Framework, which

ECO acknowledges is not an easy task. InDurban, Parties need to finalize themodalities and guidelines of NationalAdaptation Plans; operationalize theAdaptation Committee; concretize the

work programme on Loss and Damageand make specific decisions on activitiesfor the next phase of the Nairobi Work Programme. ECO recommends that thosefew Parties that have for so long stalledand delayed the negotiations onadaptation change their behavior,otherwise they will be to blame for anyfailure of the adaptation track.

ECO hopes that parties will come toDurban prepared to reach an agreementon adaptation that will give Africa, theworld’s poor and vulnerable peoples andcommunities and their ecosystems the

much needed confidence to combatclimate change.

ECO truly appreciates that thEuropean Union still supports the KyoProtocol (KP), and is heartened by thcommitment of the EU to continue (whsome might call) ranting about thimportance of a legally binding regim

This week, ECO has been particularpleased to see that the EU started to shosome more readiness to accept a seconcommitment period of the KP. And ECunderstands, from the EU’s statepreference for a comprehensive legalbinding outcome of the future frameworthat the commitments under the Protocare going to be kept legally binding.

Of particular concern to ECO is thsome representatives from particulEuropean countries favor other positionUnderstandably it can be hard to make 2mouths express the same, clear an

coherent position but this is, indeeurgently needed.

ECO believes that the EU should figharder to ensure that, in Durban, the Kwill move into a legally binding seconc o m m i t m e n t p e r i o d w i t h b r o aparticipation and binding rules. How wouanyone understand that the EU believes would be easier to build a legally bindinregime after abandoning the only legbuilding block we have?

It is in the EU’s, and the planet’s, owinterest to ensure that its commitment the Kyoto Protocol goes beyond a politic

declaration. Moreover, if the EU is reakeen to get all countries to negotiate legally binding outcome in the LCApromoting a political commitment to thKP does not seem the best strategIncreasing ambition means going up, ndown.

Next Monday, when the EU membstates' environment ministers meet Luxembourg, the EU has the chance unambiguously put its position on papand ECO believes the time has come to dso and take on a clear leading role. Taccept and adopt a second commitmeperiod of the KP does not require anythinmore than what the EU is already doing, ECO would find it difficult to understanthat the EU denied this breath of fresh ato the current climate talks.

ECO believes the EU could gain a lotit could leave Durban as the Party th(once again) shaped the outcome of thCOP and helped to save the only existinpathway to a global legally bindinagreement.

28 Mouths – 1 Voice

There are nine days left before themembers of the Transitional Committee(TC) tasked with the design of the GreenClimate Fund (GCF) will gather in CapeTown, South Africa for their fourth andfinal meeting before the COP in Durban.

It is clear that discussions are in a

critical phase. The outcome of the TCmeeting will likely determine whether theGCF will become a major driver forchange that allows developing countries toshift towards a sustainable, low-carbon andclimate-resilient development pathway, oralternatively become just another business-as-usual instrument. Will the Fund initiatea shift in the global financial architecturetowards increased ownership for thosewho face the harsh reality of climatechange impacts and wish to harness thebenefits from low-carbon development?Or will it be another body with difficultaccess procedures for developing countriesand thus lag behind the urgency of response that is needed? Success is possiblein Cape Town, but there is also a real risk of failure.

ECO would like to encourage all TCmembers to do their utmost to conclude astrong and ambitious GCF which gives thedeveloping world the bold meansnecessary to address climate change.

Concluding their task will not be theendpoint for the design of the Fund, butrather a starting point which will hopefullyprovide the framework from which the keypillar in the international fight againstclimate change will emerge. Thus, ECOurges the TC members to focus on finding

common ground, seeking compromise andshow that the GCF is a joint response bythe global community to the urgentproblem which we are facing with ourbacks against the wall. It will not beperfect from its inception, but has to be asolid foundation on which to build.

Importantly, the TC must ensure thatthe Fund is credible from its inception,and ECO would like to urge the TCmembers to ensure that the outcome of their discussions is one which civil societycan continue to defend. We seek assurancethat civil society will be given at least thesame attention as the private sector in theprocedures of the GCF – for example,through active observer seats on the boardand strong in-country participation.

The GCF will be a key channel foradaptation finance, and many civil societyorganizations have long experience inaddressing the needs of peoples mostaffected by climate change. We seek assurance that a balanced allocation

A Fund to Inspire the World

- Continued on Page 4, Column 1





between adaptation and mitigation will beachieved to correct the major globaloverallocation towards mitigation thatexists. We seek assurance that the GCF will

enable direct access to funds for developing countries, notwithstanding the fact thatreliable fiduciary standards are animportant part of direct access design.

We seek assurance that environmental,social and gender safeguards areconsistently and effectively applied with a

view to reducing the risk that GCFresources are harming the people they areintended to help. Finally, we seek assurancethat the GCF will be a key driver of low-carbon, climate-resilient and gender-equitable development pathways thusproviding developing countries the help

they have long been promised to alleviatepoverty and achieve their developmentgoals. There is still a chance to come upwith a great result in Cape Town, the worldwill be watching.


One thing that developed countrydelegates might want to report to their

ministers back home is how they spent thefull week talking about measuring,reporting, and verification. This was doneinstead of getting serious about their needto increase their levels of ambition. Thesigns of chronic lackofambitionitis areclear and have dire 4°C symptoms – including rising sea levels, disruption of food production, forest fires, increasing droughts and much more.

The g igatonne gap, whichnegotiators have left largely untouched inBangkok, Bonn and again in Panama, isnow up to the ministers to pick up. Of

course, it can still be hidden under thecarpet of a number of technical COPdecisions on mitigation, but ECO can’tbelieve anyone will be thinking that thisrelated disease has been even remotelyaddressed.

The cure is simple but requires asteely resolve. Acknowledging themagnitude of the gap and resolving toclose it, is the first step that ministers cantake as they fly to South Africa for the pre-

COP. A second step would then be move the mitigation ambition to the upp

end of the pledges. Extensive research hshown that countries like Australia and thEU can both reduce the symptoms of thbroader disease and improve their oweconomic health by moving to the uppend of their pledges. Of course, the curequires other countries to do more anthoroughly review their pathetic lopledges. This is the case for Canada anthe US neither of which is planning reduce their emissions much below the1990 levels. And this is also the case fcountries as Russia, Ukraine and Belarwhose pledges would assume emissio

that are much higher than all business-ausual projections. Preventing the deadeffects of lackofambitionitis requirindustrialized countries to move theemission reduction targets to the uppend of the 25-40% pledge that was agrein Cancun. We know that the cure within reach as countries like DenmarNorway, Germany and others have showthe way and thus deserve to be recognizeas leaders in a race to the top.

Lackofambitionitis

LULUCF has been suffering from a variety of ailments but now it looks indanger of getting FLU. The “Flexible LandUse” proposal, being heavily marketed byNew Zealand, allows countries to cut downtrees and replant them somewhere else, butinstead of counting this as deforestation andreforestation and counting the emissionsaccordingly, it brings this under forestmanagement rules – the ones that allowcountries not to account for substantialincreases in logging emissions compared tohistorical levels.

Some might argue that New Zealandhaving FLU is unfortunate but notdisastrous but this provision could becontagious - what if lots of other muchlarger countries have FLU too? What if thisproposal goes viral and REDD countriescatch it? ECO suggests that a cure isachieved as soon as possible by eliminating FLU from the LULUCF discussions.

Don’t Give LULUCF

the FLU

"Moving Planet was a worldwide day to move beyond fossil fuels, with over 2000 events in more than 1countries!" – Credit 350.org

eco 7 - 7th october

Documents