The Leadership Development Program (LDP) is one of CAN’s cornerstone programs that aims to strengthen its national and regional nodes and build professional leadership within the network....
Thank you Chair,
My name is Sandra Guzman from the Mexican Centre of Environmental Law and I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.
We call on Parties to acknowledge the role of civil society, in the designing of the CDM appeals procedure. The CDM has often been criticized for its inability to reduce emissions and contribute to sustainable development. There lacks effective public participation, and meaningful public participation is a first step to address the wider impacts that flawed CDM projects have on global climate change.
On the other hand, while we heard very positive statements in last week's workshop on NGO engagement, we are disheartened that these words could not be turned into more robust action on this issue. It is extremely unfortunate that some parties seek to hide behind closed doors and turn away from more substantive and productive engagement with civil society. We are here to help, if only parties will allow us. We look forward to continuing discussions on proposals that could not be agreed to here at SBI's next session.
It is now and here where Parties can make the difference.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you chair.
My name is Lina Li. I’ll speak on behalf of the Climate Action Network.
Global CO2-Emissions in 2010 reached all-time record levels, worsening climate change and
its devastating impacts on the world’s poor. Yields are shrinking, food prices are rising. By
2030, half of the expected increase in prices for staple crops may be due to climate change
Since I was given only one minute to speak to you, here I offer you just three areas where
Parties must make progress in Bonn:
Firstly, acknowledge that you cannot negotiate science. Recognise that global emissions must
peak by 2015 latest and decrease by at least 80% by 2050. Each country must do its fair share
of globally needed mitigation efforts, through addressing domestic emissions, as well as, in
the case of developed countries, provide financial support to developing countries to tackle
Secondly, close the gigatonne gap. Global emissions are far away from any trajectory that can
be called safe. Current pledges are set to lead to a 3, 4 – or more – degree world. Developed
countries in particular are dragging their feet. Their proposed pledges are adding up to only
12-18% reductions. Developed countries must move to the high end of their pledged ranges,
close existing loopholes rather than merrily proposing new ones, and they will have to
increase their pledges even further, as even in the best of all cases their proposed cuts will still
be nowhere near the 25-40% IPCC range required to stay below 2-2.4 degrees, let alone
what’s needed for 1.5 degrees.
In turn, developing countries that haven’t done so yet, should present their NAMAs and
clarify needs for support to implement them. Also, developing countries should use Bonn to
increase clarity on their assumptions on baselines and other key factors such as energy use.
Thirdly, developed countries should be invited to present a credible plan how they intend to
meet their 100-billion-pledge made in Copenhagen and confirmed in Cancun. Such a 100-
billion-plan should include a set of innovative sources to raise finance, such as a levy or
emissions trading system for international transport ensuring no net incidence on developing
countries to be consistent with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and
Thank you for your attention.
Thank you Mr Chair,
My name is Maike Pilitati. I’ll speak on behalf of the Climate Action Network.
As CAN has consistently emphasized, the Kyoto Protocol is important to help close the
gigatonne gap between your pledges and what is needed for the well-below 2C ambition that
YOU have agreed – let alone the 1.5C limit that is more consistent with the ultimate objective of
The gigatonne gap can be addressed through the KP in 2 key ways:
First, developed countries need to increase their pledges. Currently we only have 12-18%
reductions from 1990 levels – and that meager offer is from the group of countries legally
obliged to “take the lead” to avoid climate catastrophe. But even if developed countries move to
the high end of their pledges, this will not get us anywhere near the 25-40% IPCC range required
to limit warming even to 2.0-2.4C increases. We simply don’t understand: why are developed
countries, by dragging their feet now, choosing to put themselves on a more expensive and less
efficient path to decarbonization? QELROs are meant to drive domestic transformation to a low
Second, CAN reminds delegates that, as the current economic crisis shows, dodgy accounting
leads to collapse. Developed countries are merrily using smoke and mirrors to undermine their
low ambition even further through proposing ever more loopholes, – leading us to a 3, 4 – or
more – degree world. And you all know what that means for all of us. Let us be clear: what the
atmosphere sees is what counts.
Distinguished delegates, In Bonn you need to clarify the assumptions underlying your pledges on
domestic action, LULUCF accounting, hot air carry over and offset use. That would help us to
build on Kyoto’s existing common accounting framework and agree QELROs that are fair and
Thank you Mr Chair.
Find us on Facebook!
Jun 3, 2013 - Jun 14, 2013
Apr 29, 2013 - May 3, 2013
Nov 26, 2012 - Dec 7, 2012
Nov 21, 2012 - Nov 23, 2012
Aug 30, 2012 - Sep 5, 2012
Jun 20, 2012 - Jun 22, 2012
May 14, 2012 - May 25, 2012
Nov 28, 2011 - Dec 9, 2011
Oct 19, 2011 - Oct 21, 2011
Oct 1, 2011 - Oct 7, 2011