Tag: climate change

LULUCF: good rules before targets?

ECO has always called for “rules before targets” when it comes to land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF). We certainly don't want to repeat the mistakes of Kyoto, when LULUCF rules were negotiated specifically to allow countries to meet their emissions reduction targets, rather than to aid in climate change mitigation or adaptation.  In that light, it makes sense for the Chair of the AWG-KP to call for rules to be finalized.

While ECO applauds the push to finalize text here in Bonn, agreeing the current LULUCF proposal would be even worse than the status quo. The proposal currently tabled would frame rules that actually allow countries to increase emissions and not account for them. This will seriously undermine targets for Annex I countries before they are even finalised. We assume this isn’t what the Chair of the Kyoto Protocol really wants to see.  In fact, it contrasts rather dramatically with the approach being proposed for REDD, which starts from the assumption of emissions reductions from non-Annex I countries.

Forest management accounting rules on the table from Copenhagen allow countries to hide or ignore substantial increased emissions from forest management in their baselines. Around 400 MT annually could be released without being accounted for, equivalent to 5% of the total 1990 emissions of all Annex I parties, and a significant fraction of their proposed reductions post-2012.

Instead, what we need is a strong and unambiguous commitment to deliver emissions reductions and increases in removals in this sector, in the form of a goal in the LULUCF framework. We also need to see protection for existing forest carbon stocks. We urge all parties to consider the consequences of enshrining hidden emissions increases into a climate deal and to instead move rapidly to reduce emissions from land use, land use change and forestry.

ECO has always called for “rules before targets” when it comes to land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF). We certainly don't want to repeat the mistakes of Kyoto, when LULUCF rules were negotiated specifically to allow countries to meet their emissions reduction targets, rather than to aid in climate change mitigation or adaptation.  In that light, it makes sense for the Chair of the AWG-KP to call for rules to be finalized.

While ECO applauds the push to finalize text here in Bonn, agreeing the current LULUCF proposal would be even worse than the status quo. The proposal currently tabled would frame rules that actually allow countries to increase emissions and not account for them. This will seriously undermine targets for Annex I countries before they are even finalised. We assume this isn’t what the Chair of the Kyoto Protocol really wants to see.  In fact, it contrasts rather dramatically with the approach being proposed for REDD, which starts from the assumption of emissions reductions from non-Annex I countries.

Forest management accounting rules on the table from Copenhagen allow countries to hide or ignore substantial increased emissions from forest management in their baselines. Around 400 MT annually could be released without being accounted for, equivalent to 5% of the total 1990 emissions of all Annex I parties, and a significant fraction of their proposed reductions post-2012.

Instead, what we need is a strong and unambiguous commitment to deliver emissions reductions and increases in removals in this sector, in the form of a goal in the LULUCF framework. We also need to see protection for existing forest carbon stocks. We urge all parties to consider the consequences of enshrining hidden emissions increases into a climate deal and to instead move rapidly to reduce emissions from land use, land use change and forestry.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Finance: Flashback or Fast Forward?

While seriously short of the mark, some limited progress was made on climate finance in Copenhagen. Developed countries promised to mobilise $100 billion per year and resolved to establish a new fund to deliver it.  All that opens the door to to fast-forward, not slow-walk, this building block in 2010. Cancún must offer more than just a flashback, a rehash of weak pledges. To unlock wider progress in the negotiations, Cancún will need to deliver a robust agreement on:

* Financing institutions, including establishment of a new fund under the UNFCCC and provisions for its  governance.

* Scaling up new, additional and predictable climate finance through innovative sources, using the finance targets agreed in Copenhagen as a milestone for progress.

* Institutions, guidelines and procedures for measuring, reporting and verifying support for climate actions as well as the actions themselves, including a registry for both actions and support.

The task here in Bonn is to define clearly and lock in the loose pledges of Copenhagen, and provide a road map towards ambitious, binding finance commitments in Cancún. This will mean continuing the discussion of sources in the AWG-LCA so that negotiators can take the appropriate recommendations of the Advisory Group on Climate Finance (AGF), build on them, and agree a package of new sources that can meet the scale of needs. It will also mean clarifying the minimum scale of public finance required, to turn big numbers into meaningful commitments. Finally, it will mean taking a practical, no-nonsense approach to texts on architecture and governance to deliver finance that works for the developing countries it is meant to assist.

Real progress on climate finance at this session here in Bonn offers the best chance to lift the cold, damp, Copenhagen fog and reveal the path to sunny success in Cancún.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Where's the bill?

As delegates return to the Maritim today for another round of climate talks, the Gulf Coast is busy coping with the biggest environmental catastrophe in the history of the United States. This catastrophe was caused by oil, which likewise is a leading cause of the climate catastrophe all at the Maritim are working so diligently to avoid. What started as an explosion in an offshore rig that killed 11 people, has now turned into over a month of oil gushing into a fragile yet highly productive marine environment housing important fisheries that employ and feed thousands of people, attract tourists to its beaches, serve as a spawning ground for the endangered Bluefin tuna, just to name one of hundreds of notable fish, birds and invertebrate species that have heretofore been mostly oil-free.  Now, sadly, the spill is swirling around in one big oily mess.  Only time, the Gulf currents and the unpredictable course of a very active tropical storm season will tell the final tale, but the financial impacts are already calculated in the billions, as well as uncountable losses to already overstressed ecosystems.

So ECO is left wondering at this point: will the US learn from this catastrophe and finally pass its climate bill to reduce emissions and provide finance for climate action? Will this be a wake up call for the US that helps realize the benefit of strengthening their 2020 target?

It has been nearly a year since the US House of Representatives passed its version of a climate-energy bill.  And since that time, ECO has eagerly searched for signs that the US administration is making progress in prioritizing climate change on the Senate's agenda. Some were even naive enough to believe that a bill would be done in time for Copenhagen last year.

But as we all know, it wasn't. The Senate had other fish to fry and could not be bothered with climate change legislation.  But now that seafood from the Gulf, which provides 30% of the national total, may be coming with more than enough oil to fry itself, will the picture change?

On one hand, the news is good: Americans are waking up to the costs of their dangerous addiction to dirty fuels and looking for a new way forward. The President is finally feeling the public pressure to pass a bill that will promote clean energy and reduce emissions.

But in other ways, the news does not look good.  Some is primarily domestic in scope.  The most recent version of the Senate bill allows revenue sharing of oil royalties with the states, which will increase pressure even more dangerous and expensive offshore drilling.  ECO guesses that potential compromise will be less popular now.

But also very disturbingly, as we warned in April during the previous UNFCCC session, this version of the bill also strips most of the provisions for developing country climate finance that were in last year's House bill. Let us say that again: the recent version of the Senate bill has much less funding for developing countries to cope with climate change than even the modest contributions of the bill passed last year by the US House of Representatives. Adaptation funding is now only provided from 2019 to 2034, and is only allotted about $1 to $6 billion a year in total to be split between domestic US adaptation and the entire rest of the world. And there is no funding at all for REDD and clean technologies for mitigation.

It seems to ECO that if the President and his administration are truly concerned about global climate change, they will insist that the Senate bill include more substantial amounts of funding for adaptation and reinstate the funding for clean technology and REDD. If the adminstration does not support more funding in the bill, ECO is wondering how on earth they will meet their commitments to long-term finance? One billion dollars is a more than an order of magnitude off what President Obama was talking about in Copenhagen.

So, a message to the delegation to be forwarded to the US administration: where's the bill? Have you learned anything at all from this oil spill? And where is your plan for securing that finance you've been talking about? Can you in fact show us the money?

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

EU study says -30% within reach... but how much will it grasp?

Go Europe! It’s been a while since the EU came up with anything new on the climate front, so ECO is delighted to reveal that the Commission published a paper just last week, demonstrating unequivocally that a -30% target (from 1990 levels) is not only possible, but easily possible for Europe. All the same, the paper doesn’t go anywhere as far as is achievable.  The -40% target, which would finally push the agenda toward real ambition, has not even been analyzed (for shame!).  And the -30% target is based on the assumption that a mere 50-50 chance of staying below a rather uncomfortably balmy 2º C increase is adequate -- but let’s not quibble too much. At least the EU, unlike, say, Canada, is looking at the option of increasing its pledge, and that is progress. Even though the Commission's economic analysis does not take into account all additional benefits, it is still very clear that there is no reason at all why the EU cannot increase its pledge. Even better, it should agree that the -30% should be done completely through domestic action, so that it is on its way to becoming a near-zero carbon society by 2050. The Commission’s paper provides the facts on which Member States will base their decisions on whether or not to unilaterally take on the higher target. This should happen at the EU Heads of State summit in September. If you, like us, want to see the EU break away from business as usual at -20%, here are a couple items to mention to any EU delegate you pass in the hallway here in Bonn. * First, ask them to ensure that every European Head of State reads the Commission analysis. The figures in the paper show that there is no real impediment, financial or otherwise, to a unilateral EU move to -30%. * Second, since the most recent data show current emissions already at 14% below 1990 levels, the EU is already halfway to reaching -30%. * Finally, EU international climate leadership has always had the most impact when leading from the front, as demonstrated with EU-led initiatives like the 2o C limit and fast-start finance. ECO expects EU delegates will be delighted to express their commitment to EU leadership on climate change, so don’t be shy!

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Fast Start Finance

‘Fast-start finance’, ‘kick-start finance’, ‘short-term finance’ -- no matter the name, it must be a success if we are to rebuild trust on the broader climate agenda in the wake of Copenhagen, and lay the groundwork for the greatly expanded post-2012 climate finance regime.    ECO noticed fresh new faces in the plenary yesterday, so it would do no harm to reiterate some elements that are critical to ensure that this fast-arriving period of ‘fast-start finance’ is legitimate and effective. Transparency and coordination to report on funds provided is essential to ensuring countries meet their pledges and that these funds are indeed new and additional. Along these lines, ECO was pleased to hear the EU pledge yesterday to ‘submit coordinated reports on implementation [of its €2.4 billion per year fast-start pledge] in Cancún and thereafter on an annual basis.”  We call on other developed countries to make similar pledges, but we have some questions for the EU: will your fast start funding be additional to the 0.7% of GDP development assistance goal? And will it be new money?  Failing to meet the $30 billion committed in Copenhagen over the next three years would clearly destroy any chance of meaningful progress in Cancun.  But simply repackaging old aid money also wouldn’t send strong signals to the international community that developed countries are doing their part. Always wanting to be constructive, ECO draws attention to the fact that there are several funds with genuine ownership by developing countries that stand ready to put fast-start funds to immediate good use: the Convention’s Least Developed Countries Fund and Special Climate Change Fund, and the Kyoto Protocol’s Adaptation Fund. And now ECO hears at least one country – the US – has indicated that it will potentially cut off its fast-start flow to some developing countries that have not associated with the Copenhagen Accord.  Officials from other countries have also hinted in public about such a pressurizing strategy. Let us be clear: this strategy is absolutely unacceptable, and climate funding must be available to all developing countries that want to take serious action.  Some Parties have not associated with the Accord for the very reason that it falls well short of the emissions reduction – most of all in developed countries like the US – needed to reduce the existential risk to their lands from a marauding climate.  ECO strongly suggests the US to reconsider this ill-advised plan, and that no other developed country go down this road.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

Close the Gigatonne Gap!

It doesn’t take much effort to see that a large and dangerous gap has opened up between the level of emission reduction pledges and the global carbon budget and emissions trajectory needed to maintain a high probability of keeping warming below 2o C, much less the 1.5o C limit demanded by highly vulnerable countries.    This ‘Gigatonne Gap’ is at least 5 to 9 Gt CO2e, depending on whether countries achieve the low or high end of their 2020 pledges, according to the figures from Project Catalyst. And they rely on a 450 ppm scenario which itself is not a sure bet to keep the global temperature rise to below 2o C.  At current emission rates, the remaining global carbon budget for a 2o C or less world will be eaten up by some time in the early 2020s.  The gigatonne gap is one we can’t afford to fall into, and it’s coming on fast.  For a true and adequate response to the climate crisis, there can be no sweeping of actual emissions under a rigged-accounting carpet.  Measurement and accounting for ‘what the atmosphere sees’ is essential.    Where did the gigatonne gap come from?  There are several reasons for it: lack of ambition, loopholes in agreements (both existing and under negotiation), and the absence of some key sources and sectors.  Most developed countries simply have levels of ambition that fall far short of any reasonable mark. In addition to general un- willingness by governments, a major reason for the lack of ambition is that the US continues to pollute far above the level any measure of equity would allow.  The US lack of ambition will surely come back to bite it, as other countries seize the economic advantages of the low-carbon future. And there is growing concern about the level of financial resources to support adaptation, REDD and mitigation in the bill about to be introduced in the US Senate. If the US does not take on its fair share now to  close the gap, then other developed countries will have to take up the slack both in mitigation and financing action in developing countries.   Moreover, as the world waits for the US to stop hanging separately from the rest of the planet, the leadership already being shown by countries such as Costa Rica, the Maldives and Tuvalu to reduce their own emissions should inspire those with greater responsibility.    The ambition deficit is a big part of the Gigatonne Gap, but there’s much more.  Let’s highlight a few of the loopholes that Parties should consider closing.  There are loopholes throughout the architecture of the existing agreements, especially the Kyoto Protocol. As one example, the shoddy and loophole-ridden LULUCF accounting rules do not, in fact, reflect what the atmosphere sees. Then there is the CDM, which hardly has a stellar record in achieving real and additional emissions reductions, as well as keeping the door propped open for emitting technologies and bad investment choices in developed countries. The banking of ‘hot air’ AAUs is also a live issue that urgently needs a clean-up.   The EU Commission estimates that over 10 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emission units will likely remain unused during the 2008 to 2012 commitment period – and where and when will they land? These all need to be addressed in the KP negotiations, and no new loopholes should be allowed into either the LCA or KP track for the future. Remember: it’s what the atmosphere sees that counts. New sources and sectors of emissions also contribute to the Gigatonne Gap. Glo- bal aviation and shipping emissions are still not subject to reduction targets and that undermines the integrity of honest efforts being made to reduce emissions.   Industrial gases, including HFCs, NF3 and N2O, should be removed from the CDM and addressed outside the market through a fund approach. Black carbon is a forcing agent that remains outside any control, and reducing it will have substantial development and health co-benefits. Addressing fossil fuel subsidies, as agreed in the G20, not only will help close the gap but add directly to the low-carbon transformations of the global economy.   While the Gigatonne Gap is an urgent agenda item for the UNFCCC in 2010, there are many entry points and options, and they can be mutually supportive. Suggestions include a series of workshops to frame the discussion, a secretariat technical paper, and placement as a new SBSTA agenda item in addition to the LCA and KP negotiations. Closing the Gigatonne Gap is an opportunity for all countries not only to avoid the costs of climate change, but also to help achieve sustainable development in a fair way that respects common but differentiated responsibilities while taking advantage of respective capabilities.  The Gigatonne Gap must urgently be addressed, so that the atmosphere can breathe more easily.

Related Event: 
Related Newsletter : 

CAN-International views on qualities for a new head of the UNFCCC

CAN-International recently sent the following letter to Ban Ki Moon, the Secretary General of the United Nations in order to inform his search for a replace to Yvo de Boer, who announced he will be stepping down later this year as Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

David Turnbull
Director
Climate Action Network – International
1810 16th St. NW
Washington, DC 20009 USA
The Honorable Ban Ki Moon
Secretary-General
United Nations
1 United Nations Plaza
New York, New York 10017 USA
16 March 2010
Dear Mr. Secretary-General:
As the world’s largest network of NGOs collaborating on global solutions to the climate crisis, with an active engagement with the UNFCCC process since its inception, we at the Climate Action Network – International  wish to support your efforts to fill the vacancy left by Yvo de Boer’s impending departure.
As you continue your search for a new head of the UNFCCC, we urge you to keep the following principles in mind while assessing potential candidates:
1. Commitment to the science: The fundamental objective of the UNFCCC under Article 2 is to avoid dangerous climate change.  This objective has guided and should always guide the work of its Secretariat.  As such, any head of the UNFCCC must have a sound understanding and fundamental adherence to the scientific basis for combating climate change, applying the precautionary principle in order to ensure the Convention fulfills its objective.
2. Political savvy and leadership: The UNFCCC in conjunction with global civil society has been successful in raising the profile and urgency of climate change effectively at the highest levels.  Over 100 Heads of State attended Copenhagen and their continued engagement is both expected and essential.  In this context, the new head of the UNFCCC must be able to thoroughly engage leaders and governments at every political level.  This skill set must also include the strategic use of media, public attention, and private discourse.
3. Understanding of and experience with the negotiations:  As our collective understanding of the climate crisis deepens, the negotiations within the UNFCCC continue to become more complex.  Add to that the many challenging procedural dynamics and negotiating tactics, and it becomes clear that any candidate must demonstrate a deep understanding of how negotiations are to be managed from both procedural and strategic perspectives.  Better still would be direct experience in the negotiations, to enable a deeper understanding as well as garnering trust from parties.
4. Commitment to the valuable role of civil society and marginalized communities in particular:  The global civil society community engaged on finding a solution to the climate crisis has become larger, more organized, more strategic and ever more effective in recent years.  Further, the UN and its members have consistently affirmed and reaffirmed the importance of civil society participation in the negotiating process. Notably, indigenous peoples, women and youth are often or will be most affected by climate change but very often, unfortunately their voices struggle to be heard. Any new head of the UNFCCC must work closely with civil society, women, indigenous peoples and youth (in cooperation with the Parties) to ensure proper, complete and effective participation of these constituencies.  A demonstrable track record to this effect would be an important qualification for any candidate.
5. Thorough understanding of the challenges of development in the Global South:  Climate change poses an existential threat to many lives and livelihoods throughout the world, but most the threat is most acute in the poorest communities.  The challenge of addressing climate change and promoting sustainable development must always be approached in the context of existing challenges of poverty eradication and parallel development challenges.  In addition, participating in the international negotiations themselves can often present a challenge to the poorest and most vulnerable countries in particular.  The most vulnerable countries must be supported by the Secretariat (in cooperation with the Parties) to ensure their proper representation and voice in the process.  A candidate with a keen and thorough understanding of these challenges is needed in order to achieve the right solutions.
6. Willingness to be assertive:  Climate change is here, now.  An aggressive and rapid response is urgently required, and the UNFCCC needs a leader who is willing to be bold and guide Parties along the ambitious path that is so desperately required.  At the same time, of course, the head of the UNFCCC needs to ensure Parties feel their voices are being heard and that their concerns are being addressed in this context.  However, the successful candidate must not be timid nor unwilling to take risks where required.
7. Commitment to transparency, process, and cooperation:  The political stakes at the international climate negotiations have never been higher than at present time.  As a result the tensions surrounding the negotiations are heightened as well.  In this super-heated atmosphere, principles of transparency, good process, and cooperation can help to avoid unnecessary controversies.  An leader with a strong commitment to these principles can help keep the focus of negotiations on delivering a fair and ambitious outcome rather than on procedural issues.
8. Commitment to smooth logistics: The Secretariat has an important role to play in ensuring the negotiations run smoothly from a logistical standpoint.  Similar to the issues around transparency and process, ineffective or defective logistical arrangements can add distractions to the negotiations rather than contribute, while proper arrangements can obviously help provide an effective negotiating atmosphere.  A head of the UNFCCC with a commitment to ensuring efficient negotiation arrangements will help to ensure the Parties and Observers can both focus on the incredibly important issues at hand.
In addition to the key qualities outlined above, we urge you to select someone who can inspire. Talks are currently at a tipping point.  They need someone who can show that not only is a fully agreed international process for transitioning to a low carbon society urgently needed, but that it is achievable and indeed, the only way forward.  We need someone who can challenge our leaders to do better, who can join the calls of millions of global citizens all around the world demanding that their governments do more on their behalf.
We in the Climate Action Network – International stand at the ready to assist you in any way as you complete your search for a successful candidate.  Further, once a candidate is confirmed, we very much look forward to working closely with the successful candidate to ensure the Convention achieves its ultimate objectives.
Finally, as Mr. de Boer enters his final days as Executive Secretary, we would like to commend his work in furthering the negotiations, his sincere commitment to their success and his efforts to support civil society within the process.  The next Executive Secretary will clearly have big shoes to fill.
Sincerely,
David Turnbull
Director, Climate Action Network - International
Cc: Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary, UNFCCC
Richard Kinley, Deputy Executive Secretary, UNFCCC
Janos Pasztor, Director, UN Secretary-General’s Climate Support Team
Members of the UNFCCC COP15 Bureau

Dear Mr. Secretary-General:

As the world’s largest network of NGOs collaborating on global solutions to the climate crisis, with an active engagement with the UNFCCC process since its inception, we at the Climate Action Network – International wish to support your efforts to fill the vacancy left by Yvo de Boer’s impending departure.

As you continue your search for a new head of the UNFCCC, we urge you to keep the following principles in mind while assessing potential candidates:

1. Commitment to the science: The fundamental objective of the UNFCCC under Article 2 is to avoid dangerous climate change. This objective has guided and should always guide the work of its Secretariat. As such, any head of the UNFCCC must have a sound understanding and fundamental adherence to the scientific basis for combating climate change, applying the precautionary principle in order to ensure the Convention fulfills its objective.

2. Political savvy and leadership: The UNFCCC in conjunction with global civil society has been successful in raising the profile and urgency of climate change effectively at the highest levels. Over 100 Heads of State attended Copenhagen and their continued engagement is both expected and essential. In this context, the new head of the UNFCCC must be able to thoroughly engage leaders and governments at every political level. This skill set must also include the strategic use of media, public attention, and private discourse.

3. Understanding of and experience with the negotiations: As our collective understanding of the climate crisis deepens, the negotiations within the UNFCCC continue to become more complex. Add to that the many challenging procedural dynamics and negotiating tactics, and it becomes clear that any candidate must demonstrate a deep understanding of how negotiations are to be managed from both procedural and strategic perspectives. Better still would be direct experience in the negotiations, to enable a deeper understanding as well as garnering trust from parties.

4. Commitment to the valuable role of civil society and marginalized communities in particular: The global civil society community engaged on finding a solution to the climate crisis has become larger, more organized, more strategic and ever more effective in recent years. Further, the UN and its members have consistently affirmed and reaffirmed the importance of civil society participation in the negotiating process. Notably, indigenous peoples, women and youth are often or will be most affected by climate change but very often, unfortunately their voices struggle to be heard. Any new head of the UNFCCC must work closely with civil society, women, indigenous peoples and youth (in cooperation with the Parties) to ensure proper, complete and effective participation of these constituencies. A demonstrable track record to this effect would be an important qualification for any candidate.

5. Thorough understanding of the challenges of development in the Global South: Climate change poses an existential threat to many lives and livelihoods throughout the world, but most the threat is most acute in the poorest communities. The challenge of addressing climate change and promoting sustainable development must always be approached in the context of existing challenges of poverty eradication and parallel development challenges. In addition, participating in the international negotiations themselves can often present a challenge to the poorest and most vulnerable countries in particular. The most vulnerable countries must be supported by the Secretariat (in cooperation with the Parties) to ensure their proper representation and voice in the process. A candidate with a keen and thorough understanding of these challenges is needed in order to achieve the right solutions.

6. Willingness to be assertive: Climate change is here, now. An aggressive and rapid response is urgently required, and the UNFCCC needs a leader who is willing to be bold and guide Parties along the ambitious path that is so desperately required. At the same time, of course, the head of the UNFCCC needs to ensure Parties feel their voices are being heard and that their concerns are being addressed in this context. However, the successful candidate must not be timid nor unwilling to take risks where required.

7. Commitment to transparency, process, and cooperation: The political stakes at the international climate negotiations have never been higher than at present time. As a result the tensions surrounding the negotiations are heightened as well. In this super-heated atmosphere, principles of transparency, good process, and cooperation can help to avoid unnecessary controversies. An leader with a strong commitment to these principles can help keep the focus of negotiations on delivering a fair and ambitious outcome rather than on procedural issues.

8. Commitment to smooth logistics: The Secretariat has an important role to play in ensuring the negotiations run smoothly from a logistical standpoint. Similar to the issues around transparency and process, ineffective or defective logistical arrangements can add distractions to the negotiations rather than contribute, while proper arrangements can obviously help provide an effective negotiating atmosphere. A head of the UNFCCC with a commitment to ensuring efficient negotiation arrangements will help to ensure the Parties and Observers can both focus on the incredibly important issues at hand.

In addition to the key qualities outlined above, we urge you to select someone who can inspire. Talks are currently at a tipping point. They need someone who can show that not only is a fully agreed international process for transitioning to a low carbon society urgently needed, but that it is achievable and indeed, the only way forward. We need someone who can challenge our leaders to do better, who can join the calls of millions of global citizens all around the world demanding that their governments do more on their behalf.

We in the Climate Action Network – International stand at the ready to assist you in any way as you complete your search for a successful candidate. Further, once a candidate is confirmed, we very much look forward to working closely with the successful candidate to ensure the Convention achieves its ultimate objectives.

Finally, as Mr. de Boer enters his final days as Executive Secretary, we would like to commend his work in furthering the negotiations, his sincere commitment to their success and his efforts to support civil society within the process. The next Executive Secretary will clearly have big shoes to fill.

Sincerely,

David Turnbull

Director, Climate Action Network - International

Cc: Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary, UNFCCC

Richard Kinley, Deputy Executive Secretary, UNFCCC

Janos Pasztor, Director, UN Secretary-General’s Climate Support Team

Members of the UNFCCC COP15 Bureau

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: climate change