(a) Application of Principles of Convention
At successive UNFCCC meetings, Parties have acknowledged the existence of a multi-gigatonnes gap between the current level of ambition to mitigate emissions until 2020 (expressed in QELROs, pledges, targets and NAMAs) for the period until 2020 and what is required in that period to allow the world to stay below the critical 1.5/2°C threshold. According to the Climate Action Tracker, current pre-2020 ambition (expressed by countries in QELROs, pledges and NAMAs) puts the world onto a path of 2.7-4.2°C warming. There is a consensus within the scientific community that we are fast approaching a devastating tipping point. In this context it is alarming that governments have not taken any steps yet to close the gap but allow it to grow. According to UNEP, the estimated emissions gap in 2020 for a “likely” chance of being on track to stay below the 2°C target is 8 to 13 GtCO2e, while it was 6 to 11 GtCO2e in the 2011 report. Global emissions are currently 14 per cent above where they should be to have a likely chance to limit global warming to no more than 2°C.
As COP 18 welcomes Ministers from around the world, ECO would like to focus their attention on significant matters related to adaptation. May we have your attention, Ministers: adaptation needs are closing in fast!
This is the non-negotiable planetary deadline. The recent UNEP and World Bank reports have been unequivocal: the window to stabilize temperature increase below 2° C, and thus avoid the most dangerous climate impacts, is closing rapidly. Durban set a number of other deadlines for Doha which must be respected. They include adoption of the amendments to the Kyoto Protocol, the successful closure of the LCA, and agreement on work programmes for both the 2015 Protocol negotiations and raising near-term ambition. So roll up your sleeves, Ministers: there is much to do! As always, ECO has some helpful hints to make your week easier.
#1 Don’t cheat – it doesn’t help the climate or build confidence
The amendments to the Kyoto Protocol must be adopted in Doha, progressing the only legally binding climate agreement in order to streamline the process.
Keeping Kyoto alive is crucial for two reasons – first, it has key architectural elements that must be reflected in the 2015 Protocol. These include overall and national carbon budgets, economy-wide targets, common rules-based accounting, compliance and five year commitment periods. Second, it was part of the Durban package and its adoption will enable progress next year on both elements of the ADP -- its 2015 Protocol negotiations and near-term ambition. Pending its entry into force, it should be provisionally applied from1 January 2013.
But there are some things that should be left behind – the 13 gigatonnes of CO2eq ‘hot air’ from the first commitment period. It does nothing for the climate and it’s high time to expel it from the system. The next COP President, Poland, must show leadership now and stop stalling efforts in the EU on this issue.
The good elements of the Kyoto Protocol should not, however, remain the exclusive property of KP parties. We’re looking forward to our ‘ship jumpers’ in the LCA proving that they aren’t evading responsibility. They can do so by agreeing the same accounting standards and setting carbon budgets here at Doha.
#2 Face the issues head on
In 2015 the world must conclude a deal that matters for the climate. Parties will need to address two crucial questions: first, what do we need to do to avoid dangerous climate change; and second, how are we going to do that?
In Doha, to help answer the first question, it is critical to agree on a review of the long-term temperature goal that focuses on exactly that, is narrow in scope, and takes placeunder a robust body.
Given that equity and ambition are two sides of the same coin, we must also have a one year process exploring equity issues, reporting into the ADP at COP 19 and allowing the ADP to mainstream the progress.
Finally, confronting these issues head on means facing up to the impacts of climate change that are happening now. Addressing loss and damage is essential to assure the most vulnerable countries that their future prospects are being fully protected.
#3 Deliver the resources you promised
Vital work to adapt to climate change and transition to a low carbon economy cannot happen without resources. So delivering on existing finance commitments and planning to meet additional needs must be at the heart of the Doha outcome. Committing to a minimum of $20 billion a year for the 2012-2015 period is the very minimum of the first stepsrequired.
But in addition, ministers, you must also make sure there is a rigorous system to track the delivery of all money promised, ensuring that it is new and additional, and not quietly recycled from one vitally needed programme to pay for another.
You must also commit to a political process with the weight to ensure that developed countries scale up climate finance to the promised level of $100 billion per year by 2020. We must not become bogged down in endless technical analysis -- there are already good options on the table. All that is needed to turn them into reality is political will.
Finance is not an add-on to our work on climate; it is what drives our work, and it’s what gives the victims of climate change at least a fighting chance in adapting to the impacts. Finance must be at the center of your attention in the new negotiations under the ADP.
#4 Be Ambitious!
Ministers, we expect you to increase your mitigation and finance ambition right here in Doha. The EU 20% has already been met, the Australian unconditional target of 99.5% is shamefully weak and the U.S. steers away from anything approaching something in the required scientific range.
Meanwhile, ECO is still waiting to see even one finance figure for the post-2012 period. As a first step toward improving this woeful record, the EU should listen to the German Minister and increase its target to 30% here at COP 18.
The Doha outcome alone will not save the planet, so don't imagine your work is done when you get on the plane going home. The developed world will still need to increase its mitigation and finance ambition massively. Because your work here will not nearly begin to fill the ambition gap in either area, you will also need to agree this week on both a high level and technical workplan to do so in 2013.
We cannot afford to waste any more time. All countries need to capitalize on initiatives to raise ambition, whether inside or outside of the UNFCCC -- from reducing HFCs to phasing out fossil fuel subsides. ECO is also waiting with bated breath for announcements from our Qatari hosts and Gulf neighbours on their contribution to the global effort.
Ministers: You are here to lay the foundations for a new Protocol. You must therefore instruct your negotiators that they move in the middle of 2013 from conceptual brainstorming to concrete discussions, resulting in a ‘compilation text’ of proposals by COP19. Brainstorm and build -- that’s ECO’s motto! The re-election of President Obama and the new leadership in China has created the potential for change. Let’s capitalize on that in Doha and beyond.
#5 Leave the laggards behind
The planet cannot wait for action. Some countries are clearly not serious about our common endeavor to address the threat of dangerous climate change.
We cannot afford to wait for Russia, who won’t put a target on the table, but still wants any ‘goodies’ that might be around -- whether it means holding onto its ‘hot air’ or having access to revenues fromcarbon trading.
We cannot allow the pace to be set by Canada, who failed to meet their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, and then withdrew in order to avoid the consequences.
And New Zealand will need to make a choice -- is it serious about climate protection, or does it wish to be singled out as an obstacle to progress? These countries risk becoming increasingly sidelined, as the global community works to forge consensus on a new logic under the ADP.
Ministers, we need you to finish the work begun here in Doha. You must close the loopholes, deliver the money, addressissues head on, and map out a clear course for the negotiations under the ADP. Then you need to go home and act!
Intervention in the ADP Special Event on Top Down Approach, 2 December 2012
-Delivered by Alden Meyer
Thank you Chair. I will limit my comments to initial thoughts on the work programme. My colleagues would be very happy to address specifics in further interventions, for example a top-down approach vs bottom-up approach. (For the record CAN supports a topdown approach).
We know from Copenhagen that the “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” approach cannot deliver the outcome that we want.
One of the key tasks coming out of Doha is to have a clear workplan for 2013 and key miletones up to 2015 to give confidence both to Parties and citizens of the world that the ADP is indeed on track to deliver a fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement no later than 2015.
We are concerned that some Parties seem to think they can talk for all of 2013. While we recognize that there needs to be a brainstorming/conceptual phase; there must be a clear transition at the June session towards focused discussions and initial negotiations so that in Warsaw you are in the position to produce a compilation text of the main elements based on submissions. Moreover we need a negotiating text by COP20 that identifies the areas of convergence and divergence and the options where high level political input is needed.
In addition to those procedural steps, the ADP workplan will need to create a balanced package of agreements at each COP. These decisions need to be made taking into account developments in relevant work streams and bodies.
For example, the IPCC and the Review should provide regular updates and interim reports into the ADP.
The scientific case for urgent action is clear, we think there is renewed leadership potential given the second term of President Obama, a new Chinese leadership and other developments.
In 2013, brainstorm, but start building.
Intervention in ADP Special Event on ADP Workstream 2, 2 December 2012
Delivered by Jan Kowalzig
Thank you chair.
Workstream 2 should build on three broad pillars.
The first and most important pillar would address the inadequate level of ambition especially by developed countries that are undermining the survival of entire nations. Removing conditions around pledges or ranges is needed, but going beyond current pledges will be unavoidable to move developed countries into the 25-40% range and beyond. 2013 should see submissions form Parties an Observers and technical papers on existing potentials to increase pledges. This can prepare, but not replace, a high level ministerial process that must begin here in Doha at next week’s ministerial roundtable and should also include a ministerial level discussion in Bonn in 2013 and a leaders’ summit no later than 2014.
Another pillar, as suggested by Parties, should look at complementary activities outside the UNFCCC context, for instance action on HFCs (via the Montreal Protocol), or international bunker fuels and notably action to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.
Concretely: Where a “home” for those options exists, such as the IMO, ICAO or the Montreal Protocol, there is no need to wait. Doha should request those bodies to urgently take up work.
2013 should see submissions from Parties and Observes on further complementary activities. Focus should be on those that are additional to existing pledges and not the vehicles to implement them, as in such a case the ambition gap doesn’t get any smaller. A technical paper on complimentary activities should analyse the overlap with, or additionality to, existing pledges.
Yet another pillar of the workstream 2 should look at what is needed to enable developing countries to submit pledges and NAMAs if they haven’t done so yet, especially for countries with economic capacity comparable to some (less wealthy) developed countries and growing responsibility. We see next week’s ministerial roundtable as a great opportunity for such new pledges or NAMAs. Beyond Doha, this second pillar will also require a process to identify the needs for means of implementation to prepare, and later implement, pledges or NAMAs.
On all three pillars, Doha should agree a clear timeline of work. Technical input should be sought, including the UNEP emissions gap report and its updates, as well as submissions by Parties and Observers.
CAN Intervention in the ADP Special Event on Equity, 1 December 2012
Delivered by Mohamed Adow
We heard the loud and clear call for urgent and ambitious international agreement. But the question is – what can enable the parties to agree to such an agreement?
CAN believes that an agreement on effort sharing – an equitable approach to sharing the costs of mitigation and adaptation amongst countries – would enable parties to agree such an agreement, with sufficient mitigation and finance to support the developing countries.
Countries are concerned that they will be asked to do more than is their fair share, and conversely that other countries will ‘free ride’ off their effort.
CAN believes that we are in a rather unique position in the negotiations at the moment, and we think this is the moment to pull together a strategic approach that can lead to an effective and ambitious outcome in 2015 under the ADP.
One that will protect the climate system; share the effort to address climate change fairly; and share the means of implementation equitably
To deliver the ADP vision under Work Stream 1, Parties must work to interactively exchange their views and positions on equity and start a work programme and make clear progress towards ways and options for the allocation of fair shares of the global effort.
CAN believes that it is helpful to cluster the various equity principles into three groups:
* Precautionary or adequacy principles – because a climate catastrophe would be the ultimate injustice,
* CBDR+RC, which remains key, but must be interpreted and operationalized dynamically,
* Equitable Access to Sustainable Development – because just and sustainable development is human rights that must be both protected and promoted by the climate regime.
Parties should not use equity to avoid action and share failure, but as the convention says “protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind
To achieve this, the ADP WS 1 goal must be to cooperatively limit climate disruption, while supporting the developing countries with the means to keep within the remaining constrained carbon budget, and to adapt to the inevitable impacts of climate change.
In both ADP workstreams, Parties have begun taking positions on the future of CBDR. Some see a global spectrum approach as the way forward. Others advocate a system in which the annexes are nuanced and differentiated. Whatever happens, ECO sees the need for a dynamic system that differentiates on the basis of equity principles.
Earlier this year, ECO was delighted to read submission upon submission referencing the potential for removing fossil fuel subsidies to contribute substantially to pre-2020 mitigation ambition. In fact, it was so exciting that we counted the countries represented by these submissions. Turns out, over 110 countries supported submissions calling on fossil fuel subsidy reform to be included as an option for raising mitigation ambition.