enhancing transparency of mitigation: lessons from existing arrangements, gregory briner and sara...

Climate Change Expert Group www.oecd.org/env/cc/ccxg.htm

Enhancing transparency of mitigation: lessons from existing arrangements

Gregory Briner and Sara Moarif, OECD Based on the draft document “Enhancing transparency of climate change mitigation under the Paris Agreement: lessons from existing arrangements” by Gregory Briner and Sara Moarif

CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change 14 September 2016

2 Climate Change Expert Group

Main messages Reporting The modalities, procedures and guidelines for reporting on progress towards NDCs could be tailored by NDC type Review/analysis Reviews and analyses are most useful for Parties when experts can provide specific guidance on how to improve the clarity of information reported


Outline Reporting

Information reported to date on progress towards mitigation goals

Main goals and supporting domestic measures

Possible structure of MPGs for reporting on progress

Review/analysis

Review/analysis has been facilitative and non-intrusive

Crafting useful review/analysis process requires resources

Reporting and review/analysis practices impact the usefulness of review/analysis for the Party in question


Tracking progress towards different types of NDCs

Image sources: Indian Express; DailyStar; Bustle; Guardian

Presenter

Presentation Notes

A bit like understanding the performance of athletes in different Olympic events… Some events older than others – more experience


Information reported to date on progress towards goals has been patchy

Absolute emission targets – reference point usually clear

Goals relative to BAU levels – information often missing on model and assumptions used, whether baseline is fixed or not

Goals to peak emissions – little experience to date

Emission intensity goals – no Parties have reported GDP or population projections

Non-GHG indicators – wide variety of indicators have been used


Main goals and supporting domestic measures

Clear distinction between main goals and supporting measures in some NDCs

In other cases, the status of goals is ambiguous

Should information on tracking progress be reported for all goals mentioned in NDCs? If not, which ones?

Source: BBC


Possible structure of MPGs for reporting on tracking progress

Objectives

Nationally determined contribution

Progress made in implementing and achieving the NDC

o Guidance for reporting on progress towards main quantitative goals, depending on NDC type

o Domestic mitigation measures and their effects

Emission projections

Image sources: Rio 2016, Sun

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Flexibility


Lessons from review/analysis

1. Review/analysis has been facilitative and non-intrusive to date

2. Crafting useful review/analysis process requires resources

3. Reporting and review/analysis practices impact the usefulness of review/analysis for the Party in question


Useful review/analysis is facilitative and non-intrusive

Emphasis on:

o improving the quality of information reported

o providing greater clarity and understanding of Party’s actions

NOT on judging or assessing the nature of a Party’s actions

Review/analysis can be objective, technical, focus on areas of most use to Party

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Emphasis on: improving the quality of information reported providing greater clarity and understanding of Party’s actions NOT on judging or assessing the nature of a Party’s actions Review/analysis can be objective, technical, focus on areas of most use to Party Current experience has not been that reviews are intrusive, judgemental. Experts can focus on helping Parties improve the information reported, whether in terms of clarity, consistency, completeness, etc., and there is no room for judgements. Reviews/analyses can also be objective and technical, particularly if information to be assessed is clear (i.e. following clear reporting guidelines), and review/analysis guidelines are also clear and consistently applied. Reviews/analysis can also be made to focus on areas of most use to Party, such as key categories, major emissions sources, principal policy measures – particularly when there is a regular cycle of reporting and review/analysis.


Review/analysis processes are worth the investment

Undertaking reviews/analyses is fundamentally resource intensive for all actors

Nevertheless, the benefits of review/analysis are very high

Review/analysis process can adapt, evolve and become more efficient

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Undertaking reviews is fundamentally resource intensive: Large pool of trained experts Significant support from UNFCCC secretariat Staff time for the Party whose report is being reviewed/analysed Benefit of review also correlated with level of engagement of Party; can be resource/capacity constraints surrounding this Benefits of review are also very high Knowledge sharing, capacity building Improving transparency and understanding Review/analysis process can evolve, be more efficient Analytical tools help experts Better organisation reduces delays


Certain practices make review/analysis more useful to the Party

Clearer reporting guidelines, allowing for a more

technical review/analysis of information

Clearer review/analysis guidelines, with explicit aim of helping countries improve reporting

More space for informal exchanges, scope to include explanations

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Clearer reporting guidelines, allowing for a more technical review/analysis of information Review/analysis more helpful when experts know what they are supposed to be assessing Feedback given by experts can more directly help Parties better report subsequently, leading to improvements in completeness, transparency and consistency Clearer review/analysis guidelines, with explicit aim of helping countries improve reporting Not a focus of technical analysis, has been more challenging to provide such support explicitly; currently done via capacity building needs Experts can provide better recommendations, advice and explanations where they are clear what their role is, what the aim of these are More space for informal exchanges, scope to include explanations Significant advantage of in-country reviews; Parties can ask informally about whether information was clear, why it wasn’t, how it could be reported better Can do this through use of calls, e.g. skype calls during technical analysis Experts may also “note” or provide additional information on input, give examples of the type of information that may help improve transparency – not always included in final reports, but helpful if could be communicated in other ways


Summary: Lessons from reporting

Information reported to date has been patchy – particularly for peaking goals, goals relative to BAU levels and emission intensity goals

INDCs contain a mixture of main goals and supporting domestic measures – should information on tracking progress be reported for all goals in NDCs?

Tailored guidance for reporting on tracking progress towards different NDC types could be included in the modalities, procedures and guidelines


Summary: Lessons from review/analysis

Resource needs are fundamentally high – but worth it. Processes can also become more efficient and resources optimised.

Modalities and guidelines for reporting and review/analysis can impact the usefulness of the review/analysis for the Party in question.

Review/analysis has not been intrusive: processes can be technical, objective, cognisant of national circumstances, and focus on improving reporting.

14 Climate Change Expert Group [email protected] | [email protected]