Doha Climate Negotiations Briefing Book
Submitted by MBrockley on
Submitted by MBrockley on
Submitted by Anonymous on
The planet is giving warning as to what dangerous climate change looks like – from historic droughts in East Africa, the United States and Mexico, to catastrophic floods in Brazil and China, and heat waves in Europe and elsewhere. The spectre of worldwide food shortages is growing. These warnings are being ignored by governments whose current lack of ambition has the world heading towards 3.5-6°C of warming and runaway climate catastrophe.
Agreements at Durban opened a window of opportunity for governments to put the world on a low emissions pathway, ready to leverage clean technologies for green development and create green jobs, investment and economic development, and to take important steps to build resilience to unavoidable impacts of climate change. However this window of opportunity is precarious. Fulfilling it will require governments to take decisive action at COP18/CMP8 in Doha. Short term (pre-2020) ambition must be urgently increased and a clear pathway mapped to negotiate a fair, ambitious and binding deal in 2015.
Essential elements to be concluded at Doha include:
At Doha an ADP workplan to increase short term ambition must be agreed:
Parties must learn from the disaster at Copenhagen by mapping out an ADP workplan at COP18 with clear timelines, milestones and deadlines for agreeing key issues on the pathway to negotiate a fair, ambitious and binding global agreement in 2015. Key milestones are mapped on the following page. The ADP workplan to 2015 must be:
After the disaster of Copenhagen, leaders do not have another ‘trick up their sleeve’. Countries must deliver a fair, ambitious and binding deal by 2015 at the latest, putting in place the first steps in the pre 2020 ambition workplan in 2012, to ensure that we prevent catastrophic climate change. There is no atmospheric nor political space for a second failure.
Submitted by Anonymous on
The planet is giving warning as to what dangerous climate change looks like – from historic droughts in East Africa, the United States and Mexico, to catastrophic floods in Brazil and China, and heat waves in Europe and elsewhere. The spectre of worldwide food shortages is growing. These warnings are being ignored by governments whose current lack of ambition has the world heading towards 3.5-6°C of warming and runaway climate catastrophe. Submitted by Anonymous on
Планета предостерегает относительно того, как выглядят опасные изменения климата - от исторически небывалой засухи в Восточной Африке, Соединенных Штатах и Мексике до катастрофических наводнений в Бразилии и Китае и аномальной жары в Европе и в других местах. Возрастает угроза нехватки продовольствия во всем мире. Правительства игнорируют эти предостережения, а отсутствие активных действий в настоящее время ведет мир к потеплению на 3.5-6 °C и неуправляемой климатической катастрофе.Submitted by Anonymous on
El planeta está dando aviso de cuán peligroso se presenta el cambio climático, mostrando desde sequías históricas en África Oriental, Estados Unidos y México, a catastróficas inundaciones en Brasil y China, y olas de calor en Europa y otros lugares. Crece el fantasma de la escasez de alimentos en todo el mundo. Estas advertencias están siendo ignoradas por los gobiernos cuya actual falta de ambición está llevando al mundo en dirección a 3,5-6 °C de calentamiento y a una catástrofe climática fuera de todo control.
Submitted by Anonymous on
La planète ne cesse de nous montrer à quoi peut ressembler un changement climatique dangereux – les sécheresses historiques dans la Corne de l’Afrique, aux Etats-Unis et au Mexique, les inondations catastrophiques au Brésil et en Chine, les canicules en Europe et ailleurs. La menace d’une crise alimentaire mondiale se precise de plus en plus. Mais nos gouvernements continuent d’ignorer ces signaux alarmants en se contentant de nous placer sur une trajectoire de réchauffement de 3,5°C à 6°C et d’une future catastrophe climatique.Submitted by Anonymous on
Submitted by Anonymous on
Download the file - which contains full details on:
Practical ideas and suggestions on how the ADP can advance its work, both towards delivering an effective post-2020 agreement and bridging the ambition gap in the pre-2020 period
How best to advance the work of the ADP in Doha and beyond
Topics or questions that could be used to focus substantive discussions in Doha or in future sessions, building upon the roundtable discussions in Bangkok
Equity questions:
Practical Ideas and Suggestions on how the ADP can advance its work on bridging the ambition gap in the pre-2020 period
At Doha an ADP workplan to increase short term ambition must be agreed:
Submitted by Secretariat on
The two panels on quantified economy-wide emission reduction targets by developed country Parties left ECO feeling that there was something missing since Bali - like four years perhaps? - or a bit of ambition?
Surely Parties can cite 1(b)(i) from the Bali Action Plan in their sleep (“comparable” – remember)? Yet, as St Lucia pointed out, we still have different base years and metrics. That’s not going to help spotting the loopholes and freeloaders - oh sorry...everyone’s acting in good faith so no need to worry about transparency.
All in all, there are some surprisingly unsophisticated approaches on the table from some rather sophisticated economies – putting forward point targets rather than carbon budgets. And yes, ECO’s talking about those north of Latin America. This includes no clear idea how international credits used by states and provinces are going to affect the national level. ECO was intrigued at issues for California being considered “within the noise” of measurement. Yes, who could possibly be concerned about accounting problems within an economy the size of Australia?
And talking of the latter – ECO believes the EU’s urgings were heard loud and clear. Australia and New Zealand, you’re wanted in the KP. As they say in those parts, “Come on Australia.”
All in all, some in the Umbrella group must have been wishing they had their brollies to hide behind. Can’t imagine how “banking and borrowing” can be used with inventories and point targets? Well no problem in adding a ban to the UNFCCC rule book then... And funny how those with issues with their emissions trajectories seem to be the keenest for flexibility and most concerned that harmonisation might prevent full participation. A tip to New Zealand – choirs and rugby sides seem to manage it.
So to clarify all that clarity, ECO supports South Africa's proposal for a common accounting workshop before Doha to assist the successful conclusion of 1(b)(i).
ECO was rather more encouraged to see some of the good progress on NAMAs presented by developing country panellists. And just a reminder to those who seem to have forgotten exactly what NAMA stands for – it’s Nationally Appropriate Mitigation ACTIONS. It’s apparent that here, too, provision of detailed information is important because it gives more clarity on what measures countries are undertaking. And this clarity will provide confidence and facilitate access to further support. On this note, ECO is having a bit of difficulty seeing the support – more of this in a minute.
Now, even with the focus on actions rather than outcomes, it is still vital that we are able to understand what emission reductions have been achieved below BAU. Not to hold developing countries to a particular goal, but to track emission reductions on a country level in the context of collective efforts.
Panel 2 on means of support seemed to have a great deal of agreement. Capacity building and, again, this cleverly invisible means of support for developing countries to be able to develop and design effective long-term NAMAs (aligned with low carbon development pathways) was emphasised time and time again.
Particularly notable was how this was coming almost equally from both sides of the 1(b)(ii) equation – from developing countries in order to be able to act, and from developed countries in order to ensure value for their hard-to-find money. Given this last factor, ECO is left absolutely baffled as to why many developed countries seem to believe they have a logical basis for their determination to block the capacity building negotiation in the LCA. (But hey, ECO has gotten used to being baffled by flights of logic from developed countries many times before.) And let’s face it – some of those non-KP developed countries seem to need a bit of capacity building to help them produce their QELROs.
Submitted by MBrockley on
Tim Gore