Understanding the UN Framework Convention on

Climate Change ____________

M. J. Mace17 June 2010

Stakeholder ForumLondon

Overview

• History and overview of Key Provisions

• Implementing Bodies

• Negotiating Process

• Status of Negotiating Process

• Ways to Impact the Process

I. History: the UN Framework Convention and Kyoto Protocol

• Negotiation – INCs, PrepComs• Adoption• Deposit of text with Sec. General of the UN• Circulation of Depository Notification• Treaty opened for signature/ratification• Treaty closes for signature• Entry into force• Accession to treaty possible• Conferences of the Parties• Adoption of amendments, protocols to the

treaty

Life Cycle of a multilateral environmental agreement

Bangkok 2009

Treaty Evolution

• Complex issues, evolve over time• Flexibility must be built in • Regime evolves through COP and COP/MOP

decisions, SBI and SBSTA conclusions, treaty amendments, annexes

• New agreements or Protocols, e.g.:– 1997 Kyoto Protocol– Copenhagen? Cancun?

History of NegotiationsIPCC 1988 1990 First Assessment ReportINC 1990 1990-95 Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee UNFCCC 1992 Rio UNFCCC opened for signatureUNFCCC 1994 -------- Entry into ForceCOP 1 1995 Berlin “Berlin Mandate” (launched KP negs)COP 2 1996 GenevaCOP 3 1997 Kyoto Kyoto Protocol adoptedCOP 4 1998 Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Plan of Action (on rules)COP 5 1999 Bonn COP 6 2000 The HagueCOP 6 bis 2000 Bonn Bonn Agreements (core elements)COP7 2001 Marrakech Marrakech Accords (KP rulebook)COP 8 2002 New Delhi Delhi DeclarationCOP 9 2003 MilanCOP 10 2004 Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Programme of Action on

Adaptation and Response MeasuresKyoto Protocol 2005 ------- Entry into Force

COP 11 /MOP1 2005 Montreal First Meeting of the Parties to the KP COP 12 /MOP2 2006 Nairobi Second MOP – Review of the Protocol

COP 13 /MOP3 2007 Bali Third MOP – “Bali Action Plan”COP 14/MOP 4 2008 Poznan Fourth MOPCOP 15/MOP 5 2009 Copenhagen Post-2012 Agreement - failed

COP 16/MOP 6 2010 Cancun Post-2012 Agreement?

UNFCCC and Kyoto Goals

• UNFCCC: Annex I Parties aim to return individually or jointly their greenhouse gas emissions to – 1990 levels by 2000 (Art. 4)

• Kyoto Protocol: Annex I Parties to reduce overall emissions by at least – 5% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012 (Art. 3)

Country categories

• Annex I (developed countries)– Annex II (wealthier developed)– Economies in Transition (EITs)

• Non-Annex I (developing)– Least Developed Countries (48)– Small Island Developing States (40+)– Others – 132 in total

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

• Objective: Achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that prevents dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

• in a timeframe sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally, to ensure food production not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner

UNFCCC Definitions - Article 1

• “Climate change” - a change of climate attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability.

• “Emissions” - release of greenhouse gases and/or their precursors into the atmosphere over a specified area and period of time.

• “Reservoir” - component or components of the climate system where a greenhouse gas or a precursor of a greenhouse gas is stored.

• “Sink” - any process, activity or mechanism which removes a GHG, an aerosol or a precursor of a GHG from the atmosphere.

• “Source” - any process or activity which releases a GHG, an aerosol or a precursor of a GHG into the atmosphere.

Concept of net emissions – sources (emissions) less sinks (removals)

Developed and Developing Country Commitments

Differentiated commitments on

• Mitigation

• Adaptation

• Reporting to COP

UNFCCC Commitments

Article 4

• 4.1 – Commitments for all Parties – mitigation– adaptation – reporting

• 4.3 – Funding for developing countries• 4.4 – Funding for particularly vulnerable developing

countries• 4.5 – Technology Transfer• 4.7 – Links commitments to funding and TT• 4.8 – Actions for developing countries• 4.9 – Actions to consider special needs of LDCs

Mitigation Obligations

• develop GHG inventories - 4.1(a)

• formulate national and regional programmes containing mitigation and adaptation measures - 4.1(b)

• cooperate in development and transfer of technology in all relevant sectors that reduce or prevent emissions 4.1(c)

• promote sustainable management of sinks - 4.1(d)

• take climate change into consideration in social, economic and environmental policies - 4.1(f)

Adaptation Obligations

• formulate national and regional programmes containing mitigation and adaptation measures 4.1(b)

• cooperate in preparing for adaptation; develop integrated plans for coastal zone management, water resources and agriculture and for the protection of areas affected by drought and flood 4.1(e)

• take climate change into consideration in social, economic and environmental policies (4.1(f))

Reporting Obligations

• National communications to the COP, reporting on implementation (Art. 4 (j))– National inventory of GHGs by sources and sinks– Steps taken or envisaged to implement the Convention

• Staggered timeframes for different groups of countries

Obligations on Information Gathering and Dissemination

• promote and cooperate in scientific research, systematic observation, development of data archives (4.1(g) / Art. 5)

• promote and cooperate in education, training and public awareness related to climate change (4.1(i) / Art. 6)

Funding Obligations under the UNFCCC

Article 4.3: Developed country Parties shall – “provide new and additional financial resources” to meet

developing country costs in reporting on national needs

– “provide such financial resources needed by developing country Parties to meet the agreed full incremental costs” of implementing planning and measures (under Art. 4.1)

Article 4.4: Developed country Parties shall – “also assist the developing country parties that are particularly

vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in meeting costs of adaptation to those adverse effects.”

Article 12:– All parties must submit national communications, detailing

adaptation and mitigation efforts – Vulnerability and adaptation assessment, but limited funds

provided for this assessment

Kyoto Protocol then adds…

• Annex I UNFCCC (Developed) Countries commit to reduce their aggregate emissions by at least 5 percent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012

• Quantified Emission Limitation or Reduction Commitments (QELRCs) for each Annex I Party

• Commitments set out in Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol

• Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) (budgets for allowed emissions over a commitment period)

• Covered “basket” of 6 gases

• Flexible mechanisms

Annex B Countries and their emission targets

EU-15plus Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Monaco, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland

-8%

 

 

US     -7%

Canada, Hungary, Japan, Poland -6%

Croatia     -5%

NZ, Russia, Ukraine   0

Norway     1%

Australia     8%

Iceland     10%

Russian Federation

CanadaFrance

Italy

Japan

Germany

United States of America

United Kingdom of

Great Britain

Netherlands

KP Assigned Amounts(2008-2012)

Original division of assigned amounts if US had participated

Kyoto Protocol Flexibility Mechanisms

• Three:– Joint Implementation (Art. 6)– Clean Development Mechanism (Art. 12)– Emissions Trading (Art. 17 KP)

• Do NOT reduce global emissions

• but create flexibility WHERE and by WHOM reductions are made – optimizing the use of cheap reduction options

• Use of CDM increases total allowed domestic emissions in Annex I; projects in developing countries generate credits to offset emissions in developed countries

Kyoto Protocol: Flexibility

3 “Flexible” Mechanisms:

Joint Implementation

Article 6(ERUs)

Clean Development Mechanism

Article 12 (CERs)

Emissions Trading

Article 17 (AAUs)

A1 A1NA1A1 A1A1

A1

A1

III. Implementing Bodies

UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol Bodies

E G T TE xpert G roup on T echno logy T rans fer

Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice

(SBSTA)C h a ir, V ice C h a ir, R a p po rte ur

re co m m en d atio n s fo r d ra ft d e c is io ns , con c lus io ns

C G EC onsulta tive G rou p on N on -A nnex I

N ationa l C om m un ica t ions

L E GLeas t D eve loped C oun tr ies

E xpert G roup

Subsidiary Body for Im plem entation

(SBI)C h a ir, V ice -C ha ir, R a pp o rte ur

re co m m en d atio n s fo r d ra ft d e c is io ns , con c lus io ns

COP/M O P(Kyoto Protocol)

1 7 5 P arties

COP(UNF CCC )1 8 9 P arties

P re sid e n t, B ure au

Mandate under Article 10:• Assist the Parties in the assessment and review of the

effective implementation of the Convention• Consider information from all Parties on their

emissions inventories and on their steps taken to implement the Convention reported in national communications “to assess the overall aggregated effect of the steps taken by Parties in the light of the latest scientific assessments concerning climate change”

• Consider information submitted by Parties through national communications

A. Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI)

Mandate under Article 9: • To provide COP and other subsidiary bodies with

timely information and advice on scientific and technological matters

• Prepare scientific assessments on the effects of measures taken in the implementation of the Convention

• Identify innovative, efficient and state of the art technologies

• Provide advice on scientific programmes and international cooperation on R&D

B. Subsidiary Body on Scientific

and Technological Advice (SBSTA)

3 Expert Groups created by COP decision

• Consultative Group of Experts on Non-Annex I Communications (CGE)

• Expert Group on Technology Transfer (EGTT)• Least Developed Countries Expert Group

(LEG)

• Limited membership• All assist with reporting or implementation

1. Mandate of the Consultative Group of Experts on Non-Annex I National

Communications (CGE)

• To improve the preparation of national communications from developing countries

• To examine technical problems and constraints • To provide inputs to ongoing review and implementation

of the guidelines• To review existing activities and programmes • 8/CP.5

• Membership of CGE: 15 developing countries, 6 Annex I parties, 3 international organisations

2. Mandate of the Expert Group on Technology Transfer (EGTT)

• To facilitate and support financial, institutional and methodological activities

• To enhance coordination of stakeholders and engage stakeholders in cooperative efforts

• To accelerate transfer of technologies• 4/CP.7 and 3/CP.13 (terms of reference)

• Membership of EGTT: – 9 developing countries, 1 small island state, 7 Annex I

parties, 3 international organisations

3. Mandate of Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LEG)

• To advise LDCs on the preparation and implementation strategy for NAPAs

• To provide technical assistance in identifying data and information for synthesis

• To advise on capacity building needs• 29/CP.7, 7/CP.9, 4/CP.11, 8/CP.13

• Membership of LEG: – 5 experts from African LDCs, 2 from Asian LDCs,

2 from small island states, 3 from Annex II parties

Constituted Bodies under the Kyoto Protocol

• Clean Development Mechanism Executive Board (CDM EB)

• Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee (JISC)• Compliance Committee (CC)• Adaptation Fund Board (AFB)

• All assist with emissions trading and compliance; Adaptation Fund receives a share of the proceeds of CDM projects

• All meet inter-sessionally

Mandate of the CDM Executive Board (EB)

• Day to day operation of the CDM– including accreditation of operational entities– approval of methodologies

• Applies decision 17/CP.7, ‘Modalities and procedures for a clean development mechanism as defined in Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol’

• Issues certified emission reduction units (CERs)

• Membership: 10 members (plus alternates), 1 from each of five UN regions, one small island State, two developing countries, 2 Annex I

Mandate of the Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee (JISC)

• Verifies emission reduction units (ERUs) transferred and acquired under Article 6, in host countries that are not fully meeting eligibility reqs relating to methodological and reporting obligations

• Decision 9/CMP.1 , ‘Guidelines for the Implementation of Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol’

• Membership: 10 members (plus alternates), 3 from countries with economies in transition (EIT), three from non-EIT countries, three from developing countries, and one small island State

Mandate of the Compliance Committee

• Decision 27/CMP.1 – procedures and mechanisms relating to compliance with Kyoto targets and eligibility for trading

• Members serve in individual capacity

• Membership: 20 members (plus alternates)– 10 serve on enforcement branch– 10 serve on facilitative branch

• Each branch: one from each of 5 UN regional groups, one small island State, two developing countries, two from Annex I Parties.

Mandate of the Adaptation Fund Board

• Decision 1/CMP.3• To supervise and manage the Adaptation Fund, develop

strategic priorities, policies and guidelines; decide on projects including allocation of funds.

• Membership: 16 members (plus alternates), two from each of 5 UN regional groups, one small island State, one LDC, two developing countries, two from Annex I Parties.

III. The Negotiating Process

Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca

Montreal, COP 11 / MOP 1 – Establishment of AWG-KP and Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action

Practical Questions

• How can negotiations even take place on this scale?!!

• What mechanisms enable countries to reach agreement?

• How do negotiating blocs work?

• How are decisions actually produced?

• What is the role of a ‘contact group’? ‘Informals’? Who are ‘friends of the chair’?

• Where is my issue being negotiated? How do I follow it?

• Where does negotiating text come from? What is bracketed text?

• What is the difference between recommendations, conclusions and decisions?

• What is the value of side-events?

UNFCCC Structurenegotiating process

COP

SBI SBSTA

COP/M0P

Contact Group

Informals

Contact Group

Informals

Contact Group

Contact Group

190+ Parties to the UNFCCC

170+ Parties to the KP

Subsidiary bodies serve both COP and COP/MOP (CMP)

Contact groups formed to negotiate different issues

For Cancun - 6 negotiating bodieseach with its own agenda

• COP - Conference of the Parties • COP/MOP - COP serving as the meeting of the Parties

to the Kyoto Protocol • SBSTA - Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technical

Advice • SBI - Subsidiary Body on Implementation• Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for

Annex I Parties• Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative

Action to Enhance Implementation of the Convention

Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca

Overview of a negotiating session

Daily Programme – Bali COP 3 – December 3, first day

Example of a Daily Programme – Bali COP

Coalitions

• EU – European Union (27)• JUSCANNZ - Japan, US, Australia, Canada, NZ,

Norway, Switzerland, Iceland• Umbrella Group – JUSCANNZ plus Russia, Ukraine • Group of 77 & China – developing countries (132)• AOSIS – Alliance of Small Island States (43)• LDC Group – Least Developed Countries in Africa,

Asia, Latin Am (48)• EIG – Environmental Integrity Group (Mexico, Korea,

Switzerland, Monaco, Lichtenstein)• GRULAC – Latin American and the Caribbean and

ASIAN for nominations to regional groupings

SIDS43

LDCs49

Lower end

G-77

Upper end

OPEC13

Differentiation within the G-77

Provisional Annotated Agendas

Copenhagen Agendas for example:

COP FCCC/CP/2009/1CMP FCCC/KP/CMP/2009/1SBI FCCC/SBI/2009/9SBSTA FCCC/SBSTA/2009/4 AWG-KP FCCC/KP/AWG/2009/15AWG-LCA FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/15

AWG-LCA: Report of the AWG-LCA on its 7th Session

AWG-KP: ‘Documentation to Facilitate Negotiations’

Which documentation for which issue?

• COP, CMP, SBI, SBSTA: annotated agendas provide citations to relevant documentation, issues ripe for decisions, conclusions

• AWG-KP: “Documentation to facilitate negotiations”

• AWG-LCA: Text to “facilitate negotiations”

Negotiating Process

1. Opening Statements by Heads of Groups (Coalitions) and Delegations

- At a very general level

2. Adoption of Agenda, then proceed through each agenda item

- Oral “interventions” now more specific

3. Chairs listen to comments, then typically refer issues to “contact groups” or name persons to facilitate “informal consultations”

4. Contact groups open to the public; informals are not

5. Most heated debates take place in informals

4. If Parties agree on conclusions or draft decisions, these conclusions or draft decisions are forwarded back to the bigger group (SBI, SBSTA, COP or CMP) for adoption

Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca

COP 10 – Buenos Aires - 2004

What outcomes?

• COP and COP MOP take “decisions”, and meet once a year.

• SBI and SBSTA deliver “conclusions”, and meet twice a year.

• Often conclusions contain “draft decision text”, prepared with a view to adoption by the next COP or COP/MOP.

Provisional Annotated Agenda – Example for REDD

Helpful materials during session• Annotated Agendas• Daily programmes• Earth Negotiations

Bulletin• ECO• TWN Publications

Photo: http://www.iisd.ca/climate (Accra session)

Negotiating etiquette

• Hierarchy of speakers– Large groups speak first (G-77,

EU, Umbrella Group, AOSIS, LDC Group, Env’tl Integrity Group

– Chair of group speaks – Individual countries take the

floor to support what has been said and then elaborate

• Diplomatic language – Mr. Chair, as I am taking the

floor for the first time, let me express my delegation’s pleasure to see you once again leading this process. My delegation has full confidence in your abilities to steer us to a favorable outcome and pledges its full support to you over the coming days….

Photos: www.unfccc.int; http://www.iisd.ca/climate

Bracketing text

• ‘The Parties [ are urged to ] [ shall ] [ must ] [should ] [ may ] submit their reports to the Secretariat [ before ] [ no later than ] [January 1, 2005 ] [ June 30, 2005 ] [ the Xth session of the Subsidiary Bodies].’

• Text may be adopted only after brackets have been cleared.

• ‘L’ documents - limited circulation documents

AWG-KP Vienna August 2007

V. Status of the Post-2012 Negotiating Progress

. . . (ii) Nationally-appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner

. . .

(c) Enhanced action on adaptation,

(d) enhanced action on technology development and transfer(e) enhanced action on financing for mitigation, adaptation,

technology transfer

Annex I Emission Trends: 1990 - 2007

FCCC/SBI/2009/12 (Oct. 2009)

Annex I Party Emission Trends: 1990-2007

FCCC/SBI/2009/12 (Oct. 2009)

Emission Trends: 1990 - 2007

FCCC/SBI/2009/12 (Oct. 2009)

Source: Figure 3.1. Projected Emissions of GHGs in 2025, World Resources Institute

% Percent change from 2000

Projected Emissions of GHGs in 2025

Source: IPCC Third Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers, Figure SPM 5

(http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf)

Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report

Political challenge

• Kyoto Protocol Art. 3.9 requires Parties with targets to begin discussion of new targets no later than 7 years before the end of the first commitment period (by 2005).

• Some developed country Convention Parties with major emissions have decided not to ratify Kyoto Protocol – and thus are not working within an emissions reduction target

– United States represented 36% of industrialised country emissions in 1990

• Some developing countries that have ratified Kyoto do not have targets but have rapidly increasing emissions

– e.g., China, India, Korea; China is the world’s second largest polluter

How to address this dynamic? • In addition to Art. 3.9, another process had to be found for

engaging US and developing countries.

• Two parallel processes created in Montreal at COP 11/MOP 1:

1. Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) (discussing targets)

2. Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action to Enhance Implementation of the Convention under the Convention (Dialogue)

• In Bali at COP 13, the Dialogue was converted to an Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action to Enhance Implementation of the Convention (AWG-LCA) (discussing efforts for all Parties under the Convention under 4 ‘building blocks’)

• Both AWGs have work programmes to conclude in Copenhagen, 2009

Montreal, COP 11 / MOP 1 – Establishment of AWG-KP and Dialogue on Long-term Cooperative Action

1. AWG on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties (AWG-KP)

• Analysis of mitigation potential of current and future policies, measures and technologies (what reductions are possible)

• Identification of possible ranges of emission reductions by Annex I Parties, through their domestic and international efforts, and analysis of their contribution to the ultimate objective of the Convention (25-40% below 1990 levels discussed)

• Analysis of means that may be available for Annex I Parties to reach their emission reduction targets and ways to enhance these means (e.g., CDM, emissions trading, Joint Implementation, land use change and forestry, sectoral emissions, additional gases, sectors)

• Agree upon ranges of emission reductions by Annex I Parties

• Agree targets

Bali Action Plan launches a comprehensive process . . . “to reach an agreed outcome and adopt a decision at its fifteenth session, by addressing”, inter alia:

(a) A shared vision for long-term cooperative action, including a long-term global goal for emission reductions, to achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention . .

(b) enhanced national/international action on mitigation, including consideration of

(i) Measurable, reportable, verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions, including targets, by all developed country Parties, while ensuring the comparability of effort among them, taking into account differences in their national circumstances (United States)

2. Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG- LCA)

. . . (ii) Nationally-appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner

. . .

(c) Enhanced action on adaptation,

(d) enhanced action on technology development and transfer(e) enhanced action on financing for mitigation, adaptation,

technology transfer

Key issues in the negotiating process

• The objective of the Convention is to stabilize GHG emissions to avoid dangerous climate change.

• At what level should GHG concentrations be stabilized?

• Over what time frame? Should there be a peaking year for global emissions? – 2015? 2020?

• Should there be a temperature limitation and/or a concentration limitation? – e.g., 2 degrees, 1.5 degrees?

– e.g., 450 ppmv, 350 ppmv?

• How to broaden participation of major-emitting developing countries in emission reductions?

• How to bring in the United States?

• How to bring in major-emitting developing countries?

• How to achieve greater reductions from Annex I Parties that are already Parties to the KP?– Should new flexible mechanisms be created?– Should commitments be established through a top-down process as in

the KP, or a bottom up process as with the Copenhagen Accord’s pledge and review format?

• Should the KP disappear in favor of one broad Protocol?– What is lost if the KP is lost?– Can Parties agree to a second commitment period?– What happens to the existing flexible mechanisms? The adaptation

fund?

• What is the role of the Copenhagen Protocol?

• How can financing for adaptation and mitigation be scaled up?

• What can be done about emissions from aviation and bunker fuels? – Should the IMO and ICAO address, or the UNFCCC?– As the IMO and ICAO have different principles (principle of equal

application), what role if any does the UNFCCC principle of CBDR have?

• What about the impacts on developing countries of measures that are taken by developed countries to reduce emissions? (impact of response measures)

• Should more market mechanisms be created to scale up private sector investment in emission reductions? – For example through sectoral rather than project based

mechanisms?

Limiting temperature increase to 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels

CO2-equivalent

Stabilization level (2005 = 375 ppm CO2e)

Global Mean temperature increase at equilibrium (ºC)

Global average sea level rise at equilibrium from thermal expansion only

Year global CO2 needs to peak

Reduction in 2050 global CO2 emissions compared to 2000

445 – 490 2.0 – 2.4 0.4 – 1.4 2000 – 2015 -85 to -50

490 – 535 2.4 – 2.8 0.5 – 1.7 2000 – 2020 -60 to -30

535 – 590 2.8 – 3.2 0.6 – 1.9 2010 – 2030 -30 to +5

590 – 710 3.2 – 4.0 0.6 – 2.4 2020 – 2060 +10 to +60

710 – 855 4.0 – 4.9 0.8 – 2.9 2050 – 2080 +25 to +85

855 – 1130 4.9 – 6.1 1.0 – 3.7 2060 – 2090 +90 to +140

Source: Fourth Assessment Report

Costs of Adaptation?Funds available?

Source: WWF, Beyond Adaptation (2008)

Source: ENB, www.iisd.ca

COP 12 – Nairobi 2006

AWG Sessions - Vienna August 2007

AWG-KP Vienna August 2007

V. Ways to Impact the Process

• Organise “side events”

• Draft papers on current negotiating topics

• Discuss issues with negotiators in advance of the negotiations

• Make formal submissions to the process in response to a call for submissions

- for AWG-LCA Submissions from observer orgs see: http://unfccc.int/meetings/ad_hoc_working_groups/lca/items/4381.php

- For examples of submissions by IGOs and NGOs, see: http://unfccc.int/documentation/documents/document_lists/items/2960.php

Side events

Sponsored by • Research organisations• Parties• Intergovernmental Orgs• NGOs• Trade associations

Informative and open to the public

Thank you

_____________

M.J. Macemjmace02@yahoo.com

Decision 1/CP.13 - Bali Action Plan – elements for consideration on Adaptation

(c) Enhanced action on adaptation, including, inter alia, consideration of:

(i) International cooperation to support urgent implementation of adaptation actions, including through vulnerability assessments, prioritization of actions, financial needs assessments, capacity-building and response strategies, integration of adaptation actions into sectoral and national planning, specific projects and programmes, means to incentivize the implementation of adaptation actions, and other ways to enable climate-resilient development and reduce vulnerability of all Parties, taking into account the urgent and immediate needs of developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, especially the least developed countries and small island developing States, and further taking into account the needs of countries in Africa affected by drought, desertification and floods;

• (ii) Risk management and risk reduction strategies, including risk sharing and transfer mechanisms such as insurance;

• (iii) Disaster reduction strategies and means to address loss and damage associated with climate change impacts in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change;

• (iv) Economic diversification to build resilience;• (v) Ways to strengthen the catalytic role of the Convention in

encouraging multilateral bodies, the public and private sectors and civil society, building on synergies among activities and processes, as a means to support adaptation in a coherent and integrated manner.