EuropeAid 1 Climate Change: from Copenhagen to Cancun Hot Issues training seminar 14 July, Brussels.

EuropeAidEuropeAid

1

Climate Change: from Copenhagen to Cancun

Hot Issues training seminar 14 July, Brussels

EuropeAidEuropeAid

2

What is the problem with CC negotiations?

• US requesting equal treatment of BASICs• Annex B’s want US and

BASICs on board (competetiveness)• DC: only outcome is

amendment of Annex B for KP and set of COP decisions on rest

= need to balance demands for equal OR differentiated treatment between 3 key players: US, BASIC and KP Annex B

EuropeAidEuropeAid

3

What is the problem with CC negotiations? (Cont)• Bali « solution » on future negotiations: introduction of 2 distinct negotiation tracks: AWG-LCA and AWG-KP• AWG-KP: discussions around further reductions• AWG-LCA: mitigation goals, shared vision for adaptation, mitigation, technology and finance.• Bali road map: COP decides to launch process to enable

implementation of the Convention through long term cooperative

action in order to reach an agreed outcome by addressing

actions on mitigation of CC including

1.b.i Measurable, reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate

mitigation commitments, including quantified emission limitation

and reduction objectives by all developed countries…

1.b.ii NAMAs by DC…in a measurable, reportable and verifiable

manner

EuropeAidEuropeAid

4

What is the problem with CC negotiations? (Cont)

• CPH « problem »: how to link at the end of the process again both tracks? What outcome of the LCA track: what means « an agreed outcome »: legally binding? Complementing, replacing KP? It became an « Accord »• EU position: preference for one (combined) track but

willing to continue with KP track as long as there is guarantee that « environmental integrity » of the Convention is safeguarded. So need for US and BASICs to agree in one way or another to verifiable reductions.• Cancun: ??

EuropeAidEuropeAid

5

The game and the players uncovered

• The EU – “leadership” in question: Ambushed or dignified? One Voice? Complexities relating to 27+1 Lisbon Treaty an opportunity to re-assess EU’s way of operating in international negotiations • US – handicapped by domestic constraints• BASIC – no compromise to growth• G77 – severe internal identity issues• AOSIS – right to exist• ALBA - Bolivarian Alliance of Americas – resistance to

“capitalism”?• Saudi Arabia – compensation for future losses?

EuropeAidEuropeAid

6

The Copenhagen Accord…

• Includes many positive elements, e.g. gives basis for GHG emission reduction commitments, MRV, technology mechanism, the fight against deforestation, and financing• Fast-start funding 2010-2012: about € 21 billion - EU

contribution € 7.2 billion. Long term financial needs around € 73 billion per year from 2020.

• All major emitters (US, China, India, Brazil, ..) onboard for the first time • 55 Parties with 78% of global emission associate with the

CPH Accord by 31 Jan. Annex I: reiterate pledges on the table at COP15 (with the exception of Canada – lower target!); Non-Annex I: important players submitted NAMAs

EuropeAidEuropeAid

7

But falls short on key aspects…

Not legally binding

Neither agreed process leading legally binding instrument

No ambitious environmental outcome (no timing for peaking nor 2050 ambition levels)

Not sufficient mitigation pledges to meet the 2° Celsius objective

EuropeAidEuropeAid

8

What lies ahead?

• UNFCCC negotiation time? Procedural meeting in Bonn in April, AWG-LCA 9 and AWG-KP 11 in June, ? More discussion early Aug in Bonn; China in Oct? COP16 in November in Cancun.

• A single legally binding outcome: By COP16 in Mexico or rather in 2011 in SA?

• Simple continuation of the Kyoto Protocol is not an option

• Outcome US legislative debate … ?

• Positioning of the ALBA countries (Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Cuba)

• Other informal processes could remain important, e.g. G20, G8, Major Economies Forum

EuropeAidEuropeAid

9

What about agriculture? What is the issue?

• General agreement that contribution of all sectors will be needed if T° increase to stay below 2°C, incl agriculture• Agriculture offers options for mitigation, adaptation,

development and food security

• Agriculture already part of negotiation process:o AWG-KP: LULUCF accounting rules for Annex I countrieso CDM: reforestation projects are eligible; o Main problem = establishment of baseline and

accounting rules and related costs: problems relted to additionality, verification, leakage, permanence and scale

EuropeAidEuropeAid

10

What to expect from Cancun?

• CDM: expansion of scope under discussion (cropland- wetland- grazing land management, soil carbon management…)• Proposal to set up a work programme on agriculture (in DC)

under SBSTA to be launched in Cancun• Diverse views on the content of future work on agriculture

(food sovereignty…)• Resistance from G77 &China to engage in practical work

before Cancun – fear to prejudge outcome of AWG-LCA negotiations• The road to an effective integration of agriculture in UNFCCC

is still long!

EuropeAidEuropeAid

11

Does this mean « wait and see » for us dealing with project preparation?

• NO: look for win-win options, mainly in adaptation:• Further research and data gathering is a must• Sustainable land use management: land and water

conserving techniques• « vertical » agriculturual expansion rather than

« horizontal »: intensification (but without incr emissions)• Crop diversification and drought resistance• Mainstreaming of environment and CC in aid cooperation

projects and programmes

EuropeAidEuropeAid

12

Fast start climate change finance…

• Climate change finance to be “new and additional”• Fast-start funding 2010-2012: about € 21 billion • EU pledge and position:

o € 7.2 bn, for mitigation and adaptation (inc. technology)o Provide a first report on its fast start by June 2010 in

Bonn o All MS are to contribute – but still planning individual

allocationso Existing initiatives will play key role to avoid delays

• Other developed countries put forward their pledges, and started providing information – e.g. US (about 1.3 and 1.8bn US$ for 2010 and 2011 respectively in grants)

EuropeAidEuropeAid

13

EU priorities for fast start climate change finance

• Three key areas:o Adaptation: increase knowledge base; integration;

implementation of urgent action, DRRo Mitigation: capacity building for LEDS and MRV; carbon

market; REDD readinesso Technology cooperation, to support action on

mitigation and adaptation, through capacity building and pilot projects

EuropeAidEuropeAid

14

The EC contribution uncovered

• EC pledged €150m over the three years• €50m in 2010, equal split between mitigation and adaptation• Adaptation: €25m for the Global Climate Change Alliance,

bringing 2010 total to €49m• Mitigation – work in progress, expected to cover: Low

Emission Development Strategies (LEDS); monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV); REDD, Clean Carbon Technologies (including CCS)• For 2011, open! But expect to maintain the balance and

continue working on CB and paving the way for future financial flows

EuropeAidEuropeAid

15

Thank you for your attention