Tag: Finance

MBrockley's blog

CAN Intervention in the SB38/ADP2-2 Bonn Intersessional: Special Event with Co-Chairs on Finance, 8 June, 2013

Submitted by Sam Harris on June 9, 2013 - 3:32am

Thank you for this opportunity. My name is Alix Mazounie and I’m speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network.

The importance of finance to both raising pre-2020 mitigation ambition and getting a successful deal in 2015 cannot be overstated.

But climate finance is currently in no man's land. After the end of the Fast Start Finance period last year, 2013 should mark the start of a new finance period.

Instead, we are almost half way through the year and we've seen no new commitments on finance beyond the small handful of pledges made in Doha.

As CAN we think no developed country should be coming back to this process empty handed.

The various streams of work on finance this year, in particular the Long Term Finance work Programme and the Ministerial on finance at COP 19 (which crucially must involve finance ministers or ministers with mandate on finance), need to secure concrete decision options for consideration and agreement at COP 19:

(1) We need ALL developed countries to set out what climate finance they will provide over 2013-2015, and commit to a roadmap for scaling-up global public climate finance and reaching $100bn per year by 2020.

(2) We need agreement that a minimum of 50% of all public climate finance between now and 2020 will be spent on adaptation. Better than that, we need developed countries to make a collective pledge to save the Adaptation Fund and keep implementing ambitious projects on the ground.

(3) We need confidence that the Green Climate Fund is operational and ready to receive substantial pledges in 2014. A first round of pledges in Warsaw will send a strong political signal that the Green Climate Fund must not be left an empty shell for a fourth COP in a row.

With the LCA finance negotiations behind us, and ADP negotiations on pre-2020 ambition focused on mitigation, this year’s LTF WP is the main space for making progress on finance.

We need all countries to understand that forward steps on climate finance pre-2020 are key to ADP outcomes in both work-streams.

A new agreement applicable to all seems unlikely to emerge if developing countries have not seen existing promises of financial support being met.

So - in response to your question on our role in this process - we believe we would be fruitfully contributing to the ADP process if developed country parties agreed to our longstanding asks to scale up public finance.

Tags:

Topics:

Organization:

Distinguished Delegate,

Submitted by MBrockley on June 8, 2013 - 1:56am

The ECO Presidency is pleased to invite you to a special High-Level Observer Reception in the presence of ADP Chairs Dovland and Mauskar.

The ECO Presidency and ADP Chairs will have the pleasure of presenting you with views, creative ideas and concerns by non-governmental experts closely following negotiations here in Bonn.

The event will begin at 1.15 on Saturday the 8th of June 2013 at the Twilight Ballroom of the Maritim Grand Hotel in Bonn.

* This special event was organised in response to the numerous complaints received from delegates frustrated with the fact that NGOs are not allowed in closed meetings AND limited to short or no interventions in open meetings, due to time constraints. While we love to see delegates reading and quoting ECO, we don’t believe it makes up for these shortcomings in NGO participation under the ADP

* Cocktails will be served to delegates who write down and report on NGO views. Fossils will be distributed to delegates who do not show up to this event (courtesy of ECO).

* Dress code: black tie

Tags:

Special event

Topics:

NGO Participation

MBrockley's blog

ADP Can Finally Fix Finance Failures in Adaptation

Submitted by MBrockley on June 6, 2013 - 1:42am

Today, Parties will put forward ideas for advancing adaptation in the 2015 deal under the ADP.

As dangerous climate change looms closer and closer, and with little sign of increased mitigation ambition, millions of the poorest people in the world will face impacts that threaten their lives and livelihoods. Response to climate change through a new agreement must see adaptation as an essential component.

The roundtable will have inputs from the technical bodies, Adaptation Committee and LEG into the ADP to avoid duplication of efforts and to learn from ongoing work. This is important, so as to understand where the current architecture can be improved. However, it is even more important to identify major gaps that need to be addressed. Here, ECO sees an important role in the ADP process in correcting some of the shortcomings of past agreements.

The most important gaps are related to finance. Hardly any donor country has achieved the balance between adaptation and mitigation in the fast start finance period that was agreed in Copenhagen and Cancun. Adaptation finance lags far behind mitigation finance. Both are crucial and both need to expand rapidly.

Secondly, ECO also highlights the problem that currently only donors determine what kind of projects might be counted as fast start finance, without a voice for the recipient countries in determining whether the reported finance is really climate finance. ECO has serious doubts about some projects that have been reported as adaptation finance.

Finally, climate finance is undermining financing for poverty reduction and addressing the needs of the poorest. Almost all donor countries count adaptation finance as Official Development Aid (ODA). We observe many countries report rising climate finance figures, while total ODA is decreasing (often far below the committed 0.7%). If it had been agreed that adaptation finance counted as ODA and that it would target the most vulnerable and poorest communities, this would be less of a concern. But this commitment was deleted in the Copenhagen and Cancun negotiations, over the objections of civil society.

Prioritising the needs and risks of the most vulnerable people is essential. This means scaling up new and additional adaptation finance for post-2020, based on past and future responsibilities for causing the problem, and allocating at least 50% of public climate finance to adaptation.

Tags:

Official Development Aid

Topics:

Adaptation

Mitigation

MBrockley's blog

Less Talk, More Money, More Action

Submitted by MBrockley on June 4, 2013 - 1:08am

“A little less conversation, a little more action” needs to be the soundtrack of this year’s Long Term Finance (LTF) Work Programme. The Fast Start period is behind us, and we are already starting the period that we used to call “Long Term Finance”, which makes little sense when it refers to yesterday, today and tomorrow. We’ve had processes under the UN Secretary General, the G20, and the UNFCCC. But to date these processes have failed to result in any decisions for, or commitments to, a given level of funding from now to 2020. So this year’s work programme must be different from last year’s in one fundamental respect: concrete outcomes on scaling up.

With the LCA finance negotiations behind us, and ADP negotiations on pre-2020 ambition focused on mitigation, this year’s LTF Work Programme is the main space for making progress on finance. If not here, where? If not now, when?

So unlike last year’s work programme, this year’s needs to be firmly geared towards options for decisions in Warsaw. These options then need to be discussed and agreed at the “in-session high-level ministerial dialogue” that the Doha outcome mandated for COP19. Failure to provide concrete options for ministers to consider would likely result in a missed opportunity that developing countries cannot afford.

Today's Long Term Finance Work Programme event will focus on pathways for mobilisation of climate finance to USD 100 billion per year by 2020. ECO urges Parties to consider that by COP19, we need ALL developed countries to set out what PUBLIC climate finance they will provide over the period 2013-2015, and commit to a roadmap for scaling-up global PUBLIC climate finance, and reaching $100bn per year by 2020. ECO would like Parties to note that COP19 is already very, very late to make decisions on finance that should have been available from the start of 2013.

This year, we need new initiatives and increased ambition to close the mitigation gap and get on a pathway to staying below 2 degrees C of warming. This will be only be possible if there is an assurance that finance will be available for renewed mitigation efforts in developing countries. We also need agreement that a minimum of 50% of all public climate finance between now and 2020 will be spent on adaptation. And the Green Climate Fund must not be left an empty shell for a 4th COP in a row – that's one broken record we're tired of listening to.

Tags:

Green Climate Fund

Long Term Finance (LTF)

Topics:

MBrockley's blog

How Much Climate Finance Will Developed Countries Provide in 2013 and Beyond?

Submitted by MBrockley on June 4, 2013 - 1:02am

Based on pledges/statements made in UNFCCC…

Finland, France, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK were first off the blocks in making financial pledges in Doha. This was welcome. But the adequacy and the clarity of these pledges vary significantly and need to be pinned down.

And then there’s the rest…

No developed country Party should be coming back to this process empty handed! ALL developed countries need to urgently commit to what climate finance they will provide in 2013 and beyond, in a way that is transparent, comparable and makes clear how finance is new and additional.

Tags:

Topics:

Region:

MBrockley's blog

Time For a Timetable

Submitted by rvoorhaar on May 3, 2013 - 12:31am

The scope, structure, and design of the 2015 agreement must keep the global temperature increase below 1.5ºC. It must contain national, legally binding targets and actions on mitigation, adaptation and finance to achieve this goal within an overall framework of ambition, accountability and equity.

There has been a lot of discussion here in Bonn on the process and timetable for developing such an agreement by COP21 in 2015. ECO suggests the following:  

First, countries should agree at COP19 that mitigation action and finance will be evaluated in light of both the collective level of ambition needed to achieve the temperature limitation goal, and on the basis of a set of equity principles that helps assure the overall fairness of country efforts in relation to each other.

The Science Review starting at the next Bonn session will help guide the first part of this evaluation. At COP 19 in Warsaw, Parties need to launch a parallel process to develop an equity reference framework. See the box on page 2 for the details. The key is that equity must become an enabler of increased trust and ambition. It is also critical that, when Parties pledge their targets, they should be aware that their pledges will be reviewed both against the science as well as equity criteria.

Ban Ki-moon’s Leaders Summit offers a timely opportunity for countries’ mitigation and finance action to be placed on the table in accordance with the requirements of ambition and equity. Submitting actions at this point will allow adequate time for a full review and subsequent submission of revised proposals before COP21 in Paris. Such a full review should evaluate the collective adequacy of these proposals in satisfying the agreed global temperature goal. Each individual proposal should also be evaluated in terms of its adequacy with regard to ambition and equity.

Turning to the other ADP Workstream, ECO fears that short-term ambition is in danger of becoming the poor cousin of the 2015 agreement – when in fact it is an essential precursor. Sufficient political will to reach a 2015 agreement cannot be built without clear evidence that countries have made progress on the short-term ambition front. If it’s apparent that developed countries are not meeting their obligations to increase their ambition, then there won’t be appetite amongst their developing country partners for a 2015 agreement with an updated interpretation of equity.

So what needs to happen in Workstream two? First and foremost, developed countries must increase their current, weak targets. Despite a constant flow of new evidence of increasing climate change impacts on vulnerable countries and people, not a single developed country has shown any intention to actually increase its target. The KP review process in 2014 is the opportunity to change that, as long as a parallel process for non-KP developed Parties is established, and ministers bring ample quantities of political will with them to the negotiating table.

Some developing countries can increase their ambition too. The wealthy countries of the Persian Gulf, and other advanced developing countries that currently have no pledges, should be prepared to announce them in Warsaw.

We also suggest that Parties engage in discussion about how to create an upward spiral of increasing ambition in developing countries, facilitated by increasing means of implementation. Parties could explore practical ideas about how this could work, e.g. through a dedicated workshop and submissions by Parties. Perhaps the registry could play a role in this process.

Finally, ECO welcomes the proposal tabled yesterday by AOSIS calling for an accelerated ADP process to provide incentives for, and address barriers and disincentives to, more rapid deployment of energy efficiency and renewable energy technology. This should culminate in a ministerial roundtable and COP decision in Warsaw.

So there you have it – a road map to success in both Workstreams, at no charge from your friends at ECO. But let’s be clear about what’s really needed. The main barrier to adequately addressing the climate crisis isn’t lack of knowledge about the problem, nor is it the lack of cost-effective solutions. It’s the lack of political will to confront the special interests that have worked long and hard to block the path to a sustainable, low-carbon future. In this regard, the sustained engagement of national leaders in providing strong political guidance is critical to achieving a successful outcome in Paris. And as we all learned in Copenhagen, this engagement cannot wait until the final moments of these negotiations.

Tags:

ADP 2

Topics:

Adaptation

Mitigation

Related Event:

rvoorhaar's blog

From Bonn to Berlin: Ministers At the Petersberg Dialogue Take Over

Submitted by rvoorhaar on May 3, 2013 - 12:29am

When the climate policy train leaves the ADP2 station in Bonn today, it moves on to Berlin at the Petersberg Dialogue. Germany and the next COP host, Poland, will serve as the conductors for this next stop. Three dozen ministers from around the world have been invited to this informal exchange of views to complement the UNFCCC process. ECO is happy to hear that ministers are finally getting together to work on the next steps after Doha. We encourage ministers to put more details to key challenges identified in the past week here in Bonn.

ECO identifies the following tasks for ministers to work on during the Petersberg Dialogue:

1. Make further progress on developing a shared understanding of how to assess individual countries’ contributions to an equitable sharing of the global mitigation effort. This should include discussions on the provision of climate finance to developing countries. A 2015 deal cannot be agreed unless the concerns around equity are resolved.

2. If you are truly serious about the 2°C commitment, you’ll need to re-double your efforts to increase ambition before 2020. Ministers at the Petersberg Dialogue should explicitly recognize that developed countries must increase their woefully inadequate mitigation pledges during 2014. Opportunities such as the KP review cannot be missed.

3. Ministers should engage in discussions on how developed and developing countries can create an upward spiral of increasing climate finance and increasing ambition in developing countries.

4. Ministers should engage in discussions on complementary measures. Warsaw could make significant progress in closing the gigatonne gap by seeing various types of complementary measures launched – such as phasing out HFCs under the Montreal Protocol or a dedicated agenda item within Workstream 2 to develop options to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.

5. Ministers should identify milestones to achieve major progress on climate finance at Warsaw. Demonstrable progress on climate finance will be an essential pre-condition for the 2015 outcome. Developed country ministers need to ensure that they can present a track record of year-by-year climate finance increases in 2015. This would lend much needed credibility to further plans for scaling up finance towards the 2020 commitment. Ministers also need to ensure that public climate finance is allocated equitably between adaptation and mitigation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ECO has learned that German chancellor Angela Merkel will open the Petersberg Dialogue. Attending Ministers may wish to use this opportunity to ask her about Germany’s psychological state. ECO finds it difficult to understand how Germany can claim the limelight through the proclaimed Energiewende (energy transformation) to renewable energies while at the same time failing to support recent attempts to reform the EU Emission Trading System. Does the German government realise that it is starting to look schizophrenic? Strengthening the ETS is crucial for the Energiewende and more.

Tags:

Topics:

Flexible Mechanisms

Region:

Europe

Related Event:

rvoorhaar's blog

Climate Finance In No Man’s Land

Submitted by rvoorhaar on May 3, 2013 - 12:20am

The importance of finance to both raising pre-2020 mitigation ambition and getting a successful deal in 2015 cannot be overstated. Right now, climate finance appears to be in no man's land.

This year should mark the start of a new finance period, given that the Fast Start Finance period ended last year. Instead, we are almost halfway through the year and we’ve seen no new finance commitments beyond the small handful of pledges made in Doha.

This is unacceptable, and ECO thinks that no developed country should be coming back to this process empty handed. Developing countries are facing escalating climate impacts and associated costs. The livelihoods, food security and survival of millions of people are at stake because of a climate crisis they did not create. There can be no justification for holding back on promised finance.

Today's briefing on the Long Term Finance Work Programme provides delegates with an opportunity to focus on how the process can secure concrete outcomes by COP19. Linking the Work Programme to the COP Ministerial on finance (which crucially must involve finance ministers) is key.

By COP19, we need all developed countries to set out what public climate finance they will provide over the period of 2013-2015 as part of a roadmap for scaling up public finance towards the promised US$100bn per year by 2020. The Green Climate Fund cannot remain an empty shell for a fourth COP in a row. As they start to fill the fund, Parties also need to agree that public climate finance delivered between now and 2020 will be equitably divided between mitigation and adaptation.

Developed country claims that they do not have public money to commit ring hollow. Trillions of dollars have been made rapidly available to pay for wars and bank bailouts. And there are plenty of feasible innovative public sources of climate finance, including financial transaction taxes, switching of fossil fuel subsidies, the closing of corporate tax loopholes, bunker fuel levies and more. The current fixation on leveraging private finance must be redirected towards implementing these public sources.

ECO wants to stress that scaling-up pre-2020 public finance cannot be postponed until COP21. A new, comprehensive climate agreement is very unlikely to emerge if developing countries do not see existing promises being met. Progress between now and 2015 is critical to ambition, and will determine whether climate finance will make or break a deal at COP21.

Tags:

climate finance

Topics:

Related Event:

rvoorhaar's blog

CAN Intervention on Pre-2020 Ambition at Bonn ADP2 Special Event with ADP Co-Chairs, 2 May 2013

Submitted by Sam Harris on May 2, 2013 - 9:37am

Workstream 2 intervention on pre-2020 ambition, 2 May 2013

Delivered by Natasha Hurley of EIA on behalf of CAN

Thank you Co-Chairs,

My name is Natasha Hurley and I’m from EIA, speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to input into this very important process, we hope our interventions today help speed the process along in some measure. Ms. Figueres asked us to be as practical and concrete as possible so we’ve put together a list of mitigation actions that need to be taken in the pre-2020 timeframe.

We've heard a lot about countries’ activities and plans for further action over the past 3-and-a-half days. All of these are welcome as they help contain the infamous “gigatonne gap”. But (and here’s the vital question): Has the gap actually shrunk by a single tonne as a result of those activities?

First and foremost developed countries must increase their current weak targets. We are seriously worried that, despite a constant flow of new evidence about the increasing impact of climate change on vulnerable countries and people, not a single developed country has shown any intention of actually increasing its target. The KP review process in 2014 is the opportunity to change that, but only if new political momentum is created and a parallel process for non-KP parties established. For this to happen, you will need to bring Ministers to the table.

Some developing countries can increase their ambition too. We expect pledges from the Gulf countries and other advanced countries currently without pledges, to be announced in Warsaw.

We also suggest that WS2 engages in discussion on how to create an upward spiral of increasing ambition in developing countries and increasing means of implementation. Parties could explore practical ideas on what this could look like - it could be through a dedicated workshop and submissions by Parties, for example. Perhaps the registry could play a role in this process.

Complementary initiatives are an additional option to close the gap:

For instance, WS2 should identify a home for agreeing concrete steps to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. Parties should be asked to submit their planned action on fossil fuel subsidies, and developed countries should announce action to immediately phase out subsidies. For developing countries, a dedicated workshop could explore options to look at the links between phasing out subsidies and advancing development priorities.

We also support the idea that the Warsaw COP invite action to phase-down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol, with its effective and proven mechanism for technology transfer and financial support for developing countries. We suggest WS2 start drafting a COP decision on this now.

And finally, complementary action is also needed on international transport. The ICAO Council meeting in June should be used as an opportunity to make progress on a comprehensive global approach to aviation emissions that includes carbon pricing. We are worried by the double-narrative coming from some countries, who say in this forum that they want to increase pre-2020 ambition, but nonetheless oppose real progress under ICAO.

Thank you very much.

Topics:

Mitigation

Organization:

AWG-ADP

Climate Action Network

Related Event: