Background paper 17 th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Durban, South Africa 28 November - 9 December 2011 Prepared by: Gabriela Fischerova - Climate Change Policy Advisor UNDP BRC Bratislava, Slovakia, November 2011
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Background paper
17th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework
Introduction This document aims to provide short overview of the key issues to be discussed and decided in
Durban for those who do not follow the negotiations on daily basis or need only ad hoc
orientation in the up-coming event. The more detailed information on agenda items of specific
events are provided in a separate annex.
The views expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the
views of, and should not be attributed to, the UNDP.
General Information The 17 Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change will th
bring together representatives of the world's governments, international organizations and civil
society. The discussions will seek to advance, in a balanced manner, the implementation of the
Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007,
and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP 16 last December.
The Durban Conference will comprise:
• The 17th Conference of the Parties (COP 17)
• The 7th Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP 7)
• The 35th session of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI 35)
• The 35th session of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 35)
• The fourth part of the 16th session of Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP 16-4)
• The fourth part of the 14th session of Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term
Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA 14-4)
Joint SBs workshop on the Nairobi work programme will be organized on Wednesday 30
November from 10:00 to 13:00.
In conjunction with these formal sessions, several pre-sessional meetings will take place in
Durban:
• 65th meeting of the Clean Development Mechanism Executive Board (21 to 25
November)
• Least developed countries Preparatory Meetings (22 to 23 November)
• Small island developing States Preparatory Meetings (24 to 25 November)
• 27th meeting of the Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee (24 to 25 November)
• African Group Preparatory Meetings (24 to 25 November)
• G-77 & China Preparatory Meetings (26 to 27 November)
The Conference will be hosted by the Government of South Africa and will take place at the
International Convention Centre (ICC) & Durban Exhibition Centre (DEC) from 28 November
to 9 December 2011.
Key Issues for Durban
Among 84 formal agenda items altogether there are expected few key outcomes from Durban
which are critical for further continuation of meaningful international regime for combating
climate change. These are:
• 2nd Commitment period under the Kyoto protocol adopted
• Outline/roadmap for the new global agreement adopted
• Standing Committee approved and Green Climate Fund rules in place
• Adaptation Committee established
• Climate Technology Centre and Network agreed
• Capacity building framework agreed The items above are interlinked and conditioned so that the progress or lack of progress in one
item could seriously affect the discussions on other one.
In the following text, each of these items is shortly explained and the current situation in
negotiations described.
2nd Commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol (2nd CP)
Adoption of the second commitment period is embedded in the article 3, paragraph 9 of the
Kyoto protocol. While for the first commitment period, 38 developed county parties of the KP
were committed to reduce or limit their emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) during the period
of 2008 - 2012 (without the US who did not ratify the KP), now already three other parties have
declared that they do not intend to commit themselves to any 2nd CP under the KP: Canada,
Japan, and Russia. This means that any potential 2nd CP would include parties responsible for less
than 40% of developed countries emissions in 2008 and less than 25% of the global emissions.
Australia, New Zealand and others consider the 2nd CP as transitional to a global treaty.
Therefore, in order to reach the ultimate objective of the UNFCCC (to achieve stabilization of
greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system) more action is needed to curb the emissions
from all major economies.
Many developing countries made it clear in their statements that without 2nd CP they are
notwilling to discuss any possible outcome on global regime. The simple adoption of the 2nd CP
would not be sufficient with current pledges of reduction from Annex B countries. These are now
far below what is needed with respect to keep the temperature rise by the end of 2100 below 2°C.
Translated to the concentrations and percentages it means that the concentration of GHGs in the
atmosphere should not exceed 450 ppm (parts per million) and developed countries should
reduce their emissions by 25% to 40% by 2020.
In Durban, parties should agree whether there will be any second commitment period and if yes
what are the commitments and the conditions. The technical discussions on some specific aspects
of the 2nd CP already reached the impasse which cannot be removed without taking political
decision. As this can be taken only by ministers it might be expected that the 2nd CP will be in the
centre of interest of high level segment.
3.9. Commitments for subsequent periods for Parties included in Annex I shall be established in amendments to Annex B to this Protocol, which shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Article 21, paragraph 7. The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol shall initiate the consideration of such
commitments at least seven years before the end of the first commitment period referred to in paragraph 1 above.
Outline/roadmap for the new global agreement
The differences in the status of countries (among developed countries as well as among
developing countries) both in economic and legal terms make it very difficult to negotiate
comparable conditions and commitments under current international agreements—UNFCCC and
the KP. For example, the US not being the party to the Kyoto Protocol, and Canada, Japan, and
Russia (and maybe some other developed countries) not willing to be a part of the 2nd CP, the rest
of the developed countries have to negotiate under the Convention similar level of effort for all
developed countries. Since the beginning of the work of the ad hoc groups, there is a strong
emphasis on keeping these two tracks separated and even though there are many common issues,
formally they are two different tracks.
The complicated negotiation settings and the weak coverage of the emissions in the potential 2nd
commitment period have led to the proposal by some parties to start negotiations on a new global
agreement to be completed sometime within the next four year. This is rather new idea and will
not lead to any specific legal outcome, but the outline or roadmap for the process for next few
years might be considered as sufficient commitment to follow the international process that—at
the end—will head for the sensible and sustainable global deal. As the theme is highly political,
it needs to be decided by high level segment, very likely in parallel with the 2nd CP.
Standing Committee and Green Climate Fund
The Cancun Agreements (para 112) also established a Standing Committee to assist the COP in
exercising its functions with respect to the operationalisation of the financial mechanism of the
Convention. While there is a common view on the need for the standing Committee, there are
still some issues of divergence:
• Status: should the SC be a permanent subsidiary body or not, scope of work and
responsibilities
• Composition of SC: how many members—16 or 24, from which constituencies,
advisory members
• How to work: frequency of the meetings, mode of work: sub-committees, or
experts from NWP, linkages to other work
• Activities of the SC for the first year: procedural and substantive, for adoption by
COP18
The Cancun Agreements also called for scaled-up, new and additional, predictable and adequate
funding to be provided to developing countries and asked the developed countries to commit to
joint goal of mobilizing jointly 100 billion USD per year by 2020. Significant share of these new
funds should flow through the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The Transitional Committee (TC) for
the design of the Green Climate Fund was established during the first half of the year 2011. The
TC has met four times and prepared and forwarded a governing instrument for the GCF to
COP17 for consideration and adoption. The text was forwarded without brackets and can be
adopted as it stands. It is a delicate balance between what politically is achievable and what is
substantively needed on the ground to drive a paradigm shift in addressing climate change in
developing countries. Politically, the document provides donor countries with a high degree of
flexibility, while as the same time driving scaled up implementation mechanisms for developing
countries, including on direct access. In terms of the substance of the GCF, this flexibility means
that all governments are presented with an opportunity and none with an obligation.
In terms of generating a tangible paradigm shift in the delivery of climate finance, the 8 page
document is the foundation for a Fund that is greater than the sum of individual countries'
negotiating positions. It represents both the crucial political balance and also a Fund that is
substantively and technically different from business-as-usual with new, innovative components
in the form of objectives, governance arrangements, and operational modalities. While individual
governments may benefit from changes to the text, others may not, and the balance and
flexibility of the GCF constructed by the TC may be lost. It therefore is in the collective interest
of all governments to adopt this document in its current form.
However, the TC itself did not adopt the instrument due to the lack of consensus among
members of TC and there might be further discussion on the content of the governing instrument
before adopting it. This could lead to loosing of political momentum and the delays in
operalization of the GCF.
Adaptation Committee
The activities related to climate change on international and national levels were predominantly
focused on mitigation in the past decades. The importance of adaption was highlighted first in
Bali Action Plan in 2007 and it was also reflected in Cancun Agreements where the decision to
establish Adaptation Committee was taken (para 20) "to promote the implementation of
enhanced action on adaptation in a coherent manner under the convention through providing
technical support and guidance to parties, strengthening, consolidating and enhancing the sharing
of relevant information, knowledge, experience and good practices, promoting synergies and
providing information and recommendations". There is a draft decision prepared, however it still
contains various divergencies on the issues such as composition oth AC, how many members,
from which constituencies, whether the AC should comprise also advisory members were
discussed, frequency of the meetings of the AC, mode of work (sub-committees or experts from
NWP); when to review the AC (after 4 years and then periodically every 3 years or only after 4
years); activities of the AC for the first year: procedural and substantive. The work plan of the AC
should be adopted by COP18 in 2012. Parties in Durban are expected to find the compromises
on the above issues and finalize text of the decision in the way it caould be adopted by the COP.
Climate Technology Centre and NetworkAccording to the Cancun Agreement, Climate
Technology Centre and Network should be established as a part of the technology mechanism
(paras . It should be fully functional in 2012, so the Durban conference has to decide on the ToRs
for CTCN, procedures how to selection of the host organization, selection criteria and governing
issues. The UNFCCC Secretariat will help parties with organizing selection procedure, but
decisions have to be taken by parties through the COP.
According to Cancun Agreement, Climate Technology Centre and Network should be established
as a part of the technology mechanism. It should be fully functional in 2012, so the Durban
conference has to decide on the ToRs for CTCN, procedures how to select the host organization,
selection criteria and governing issues. The UNFCCC Secretariat will help parties with
organizing selection procedure, but decisions have to be taken by parties through the COP. Draft
decision was discussed, and procurement draft to be prepared by UNFCCC Secretariat. Main
undecided issues remaining to be solved in Durban are:
• Governance: Should CTCN have its own independent governance structure or will be
govern by Technology Executive Committee
• Selection procedure: timeline, who will do actual evaluation and selection - TEC or
special panel of 6 experts
• Architecture: Only one seat or regional and country offices; relation to the network and
governments, linkages to financial and adaptation mechanisms
• Other issues: Selection criteria; financing of the CTCN; reporting, roles and
responsibilities; ToRs
Capacity building framework
Two papers are ready to be the basis of discussions on CB in Durban: (a) compilation of
submissions in a draft decision; and (b) summary of the facilitator of in-depth discussion on CB
works in institutions and initiatives under the Convention.
Capacity building: Discussions in the informal group addressed the need for more
coherence of capacity building under the different UNFCCC processes and emphasized
the cross-cutting nature of capacity building. Parties discussed gaps in the delivery of
capacity building as either integrated elements of projects and programmes or stand-alone
activities. Parties discussed where, and how, capacity building is integrated in the
mandates and work programmes of the LDC Expert Group (LEG) and the Consultative
Group of Experts (CGE). The paper is rather consolidated with the only few issues to be
decided (whether to establish a new enhanced mechanisms to assist SBI or SBI should
review its work on CB; to whom to address the request to undertake CB activities: only to
existing bodies or to the newly established as well). The issue of financing the CB
activities is also linked to finance, adaptation and technology discussion.
Capacity-building work in institutions and initiatives under the Convention: summary of
the in-depth discussion on this topic is captured in the summary of the facilitator.
Background document prepared by secretariat was presented and commented on by
parties. Linkages with other bodies such as Consultative Group of Experts on National
Communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention (CGE), the
Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LEG), GEF. Parties are urged to present
textual proposals before the next meeting as a basis to move forward in the negotiations.
Practical Information The conference will start on Monday 28 November with welcoming ceremony. After the
ceremony, the opening session of the COP 17 will take place, followed by the opening session of
the CMP 7. In the afternoon two parallel opening sessions for subsidiary bodies are planned.
The work of ad hoc working groups will start on Tuesday morning with the opening session of
AWG KP 16-4 followed by AWG LCA 14-4 in the afternoon.
After than the work will be carried out mostly in contact and informal groups with one plenary
sessions of COP and CMP planned for Wednesday 30 November (morning and afternoon).
The SBs are supposed to complete their work by Saturday of the first week, AWGs will continue
as needed.
Ceremonial opening of high-level segment is planned for Tuesday afternoon of the second week
(6 December) followed by national statements of high level representatives of parties in front of
joint COP and CMP session.
Closing sessions are scheduled for Friday afternoon (9 December at 15:00)
Given that six bodies will be meeting during the sessional period, meeting time will be very
limited, especially for contact groups. To maximize the time available for negotiations, the
presiding officers, in consultation with the Parties, may propose timesaving measures and
approaches to expedite work. Such proposals will be based on these consultations, and on
relevant submissions and statements made during plenary meetings, and take into account any
previous negotiations and/or conclusions.
ANNEX
To the Background paper
17 Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention th
on Climate Change Durban, South Africa
28 November - 9 December 2011
I. The AWG-KP 16 (third part)
The work of the Ad hoc Working group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties
under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG KP) had continued its work on the revised proposal by the
Chair which forms the basis for negotiating the text for Durban. The proposal has five chapters
and each was discussed in separate informal group.
Chapter I:
Chapter II: Chapter III: Chapter IV:
Chapter V:
Amendments to the Kyoto protocol pursuant to its Article 3, paragraph 9
(2nd commitment period)
Land-use, land-use change and forestry Emission trading and the project-based mechanisms
Greenhouse gases, sectors and source categories, common metrics to
calculate the carbon dioxide equivalence of anthropogenic emissions by
sources and removals by sinks, and other methodological issues (Basket of
issues)
Consideration of information of potential environmental, economic and
social consequences, including spillover effects, of tools, policies,
measures and methodologies available to Annex I Parties (potential
consequences)
The document can be found on: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/awg16/eng/crp02r01.pdf
While the work on the chapters IV and V progressed relatively successfully, the chapter I
seemed to be most difficult. This is not surprising given the highly political character of the
second commitment period (2nd CP). The three countries, Canada, Japan, and Russia which
already declared that they will not commit to the second commitment period under the Kyoto
Protocol reiterated their intention not to do so also in Panama. Without them and without the US
(who did not ratify the Protocol), the potential second commitment period seems to be covering
only around 16% of the global greenhouse gas emissions and many developed countries are
starting to look at it as at transitional arrangements before some kind of global agreement is
reached. However, the 2nd CP is an unavoidable political condition of developing countries to
continue discussions on global agreement. Thus, for many the 2nd commitment period is
becoming sort of transition from current international regime dividing parties to developed
parties with reduction commitments and developing countries without reduction commitments to
new global treaty covering all major emitters respecting the principle of common but
differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities.
Low level of ambition of developed countries to reduce their emissions threatens the
objective of not to let the global temperature rise by more than 2°C by the end of the century
compared to pre-industrial times. With the current pledges, the world is on the path to 3.5°C to
4°C.
Overall assessment of the Panama progress is highly positive and it is believed that in
Durban the AWG KP might come to an end of its mandate.
In the following text more detailed analyses of individual chapters of the revised proposal by the
Chair is presented.
Chapter I: Amendments to the Kyoto protocol pursuant to its Article 3, paragraph 9 (2nd
commitment period)
The text of Chapter I consists of the draft text of the decision itself and its annex. The draft
decision offers two options how to reach the continuation of the Kyoto protocol: option 1 simply
says that the CMP adopts the amendments to the Kyoto protocol as contained in the annex to the
decision while option 2 is based on conditionality with regard to the adoption of a protocol under
the Ad hoc Working Group on long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG LCA)
track. In other words, the CMP will adopt the amendments to the Kyoto Protocol which shall
take effect only after some legal document is adopted under the LCA track. The issues discussed
under the chapters II to V would be decided by separate decisions also to be adopted by CMP7.
Annex to the draft decision contains substantial parts for 2nd commitment period to be
implemented: Part A is the table with quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments
(QELRCs) and the length of the 2nd CP. From three current proposals of the table of annex B,
first and last options are almost identical with the existing Annex B, listing countries with the
quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments for the period 2008 - 2012 and
providing columns for commitments for the next commitment period. The duration of the 2nd CP
is proposed to be either five years (from 2013 to 2017) or seven years (from 2013 to 2020).
Option 2 specifies the commitments for developed countries which a party to the KP in the form
of quantified domestic emission reduction and in the form of total reductions required, based on
historical responsibility and the needs of developing countries. All QELRCs are to be expressed
as a percentage of the base year or period. There are no numbers for the next commitment period
yet.
Part B of the annex contains proposal for textual amendments of the Kyoto protocol, mostly on
Article 3 (commitments). These relate the legal expression of commitments, length of the second
commitment period, and aggregated level of reduction (by all Annex B countries). Other
proposed changes are for Article 4 (paragraphs 2 and 3), Article 6 (paragraph 5), Article 9, 15,
17, 18, and 21. New articles are proposed related to potential new market mechanism.
Decisions needed to be taken in Durban:
• Annex I Parties have to commit to the second commitment period
• Numbers - need to transform current or more ambitious pledges of Annex I countries to
concrete figures expressed as a percentage of the base year or period (option 1 and 3) or
reduction commitments or to domestic emission reduction and total reduction required
based on historic responsibility (option 2)
• Length of the second commitment period - five or seven years
• Status of current countries with their economies in transition and the Turkey
Chapter II: Land-use, land-use change and forestry
The Chapter II provides draft decision to amend current LULUCF rules (decision 16/CMP.1).
The aim is to accommodate proposals from parties for changes based on the lessons learned from
the first commitment period and to adjust the rules for potential 2nd commitment period.
The main issues to be decided in Durban under the LULUCF are:
• New definition of wetland drainage and rewetting is included, and there might be
changes in the definition of forests, however, textual proposals are not included yet.
• What activities should be accounted for fulfilling the reduction commitments - in the 1st
CP, parties may chose whether to account only for afforestation, reforestation and
deforestation or to cover also other activities: revegatation, forest management, cropland
management, grazing land management. According to the proposal for 2nd CP ALL parties
would be committed to the same activities, the voluntary element disappears.
• Accounting rules for forest management - there are five options proposed: 1.
Reference levels; 2. Baselines; 3. Net-net accounting relative to the 1st CP; 4. Cap; 5. No
changes to the 1st CP.
• Natural disturbances - whether and how to account for emissions caused by natural
disturbances. There is an agreement on a revised text on force majeure, now known as
"disturbances," with a few issues outstanding (conditions for possible exclusion of
emissions from natural disturbance).
• Harvested wood products - they were not accounted for in the 1st CP. The proposed text
contains three options how to account for emissions from harvested processed wood:
based on default decay functions; based on default half-lives; and based on instant
oxidation.
• "Flexible land-use" - possibility for parties to decide whether they account for
emissions from the conversion to a non-forest land of a forest by human-induced planting
Chapter III: Emission trading and the project-based mechanisms
The work on flexible mechanisms did not progress much due to the lack of political decisions,
mostly on existence of the second commitment period and on some highly political issues such
as whether to include nuclear activities or carry-over of assigned amount units (AAUs) unused in
the 1st commitment period. The only significant change was the removal of the proposal to apply
discount factor on CERs from certain type of CDM activities.
The progress was small and there are still many issues to be decided on political level in Durban.
These are mainly:
• Conditions for continuation of the use of credits from mechanisms (only parties who
ratified second commitment period or to all parties to the Kyoto Protocol)
• Activities relating to nuclear facilities - eligibility for inclusion into CDM or JI (yes or
no)
• Carry-over of units from the first commitment period - there are three options on carry-
over amount: 1. limits to be decided; 2. no restriction; and 3. More elaborated text on
limitations (quantitative limits, limitation on domestic use, and ban on trade units). The
Democratic Republic of the Congo, on behalf of the African Group proposed that carry-
over from the first to the second commitment period should be limited to 1% of each
party's first commitment period AAUs, and that parties should be able to sell the amounts
carried over, with 50% of the revenue to be transferred to the Adaptation Fund.
• Share of proceeds - currently, share of proceeds are applied only on the CER. There are
now proposals to extend the share of proceeds also to other two mechanisms under the
KP: on Joint Implementation and on International Emission Trading; and to increase
percentage of share of proceeds form CDM
• New market-based mechanisms - parties have to decide whether to establish new
market-based mechanisms for the second commitment period or not
Chapter IV: Greenhouse gases, sectors and source categories, common metrics to
calculate the carbon dioxide equivalence of anthropogenic emissions
by sources and removals by sinks, and other methodological issues
(Basket of issues)
This chapter is most elaborate from all chapters. The text contains two sets of options (A and B)
covering the same issues (see below). Parties may decide to agree on option A removing the
brackets from nitrogen triflouride or to negotiate more issues still undecided under the option B.
• 2006 IPCC Guidelines for national GHG Inventories - waiting for the outcome of the
LULUCF
• Inclusion of the new gases - either only nitrogen triflouride, or also fluorinated ethers,
perfluoropolyethers, and and trifluoromethyl sulphur pentafluoride
• Global warming potential - which values should be used, those in the Second
Assessment report by IPCC or new ones from the Fourth Assessment report
Chapter V: Consideration of information of potential environmental, economic and
social consequences, including spillover effects, of tools, policies, measures
and methodologies available to Annex I Parties (potential consequences)
The text on response measures under the AWG KP is almost ready for adoption, concentrating on
understanding of potential consequences and observed impacts through various means such as
regular and systemic provision of information. How to report ant to whome still remains
undecided:
• Reporting on the potential consequences and observed impacts - should there be
permanent forum established as a forum to report and evaluate impacts and consequences
or should the existing channels, such as national communications be used
II. The AWG LCA 14 (third part)
The third part of the 14th session of AWG LCA had continued its work on building blocks of Bali
action plan, in order to implement Cancun agreement. The work had been carried out in one
contact group and individual items were discussed in informal groups. This chapter provides
overview of the specific outcomes from the groups identifying issues forwarded to further
discussion (and possible decision) in Durban.
3.1. Shared vision
(Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Cancun Agreement: 5. Agrees, in the context of the long-term goal and the ultimate objective of the Convention and the Bali Action Plan, to work towards identifying a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050, and to consider it at its seventeenth session; 6. Also agrees that Parties should cooperate in achieving the peaking of global and national greenhouse gas
emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that the time frame for peaking will be longer in developing countries,
and bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding
priorities of developing countries and that a low-carbon development strategy is indispensable to sustainable
development. In this context, further agrees to work towards identifying a timeframe for global peaking of
greenhouse gas emissions based on the best available scientific knowledge and equitable access to sustainable development, and to consider it at its seventeenth session) The informal group on shared vision ended up with the non-paper in some form of the draft
decision with 17 sub-headings. Apart from those discussed in this group in Bonn few more were
added, covering now Global goal for substantially reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by
2050; Time frame for global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions; Equity; Historical
responsibility; Establishment of global goals for finance, technology, adaptation, and for
capacity-building; Trade; Response measures; Intellectual property issues in relation to
technology; Low-carbon and climate-resilient society; Human rights; Rights of mother earth;
Right to survive; An international climate court of justice; and Warfare.
There are two main items under the Shared vision to be agreed in Durban:
• Global goal for global emissions reduction by 2050 - proposal are to set the global goal
on 50% or 85% or 90% from 1990 levels by 2050, with the possibility to update the
global goal based on the review to be carried out in 2013 or 2015 (the year of the review
still to be decided under the agenda item Review). Another proposal sets the global goal
to more than 100% by 2040.
• Goal for developed countries by 2020 - to reach the global goal, there is a text requiring developed countries to reduce their emissions by 30%, or 40% or 45% by 2020. Aligned
to the proposal of 100% reduction, there is a proposal for developed countries to reduce
their emissions by more than 50% by 2017.
• Time frame for global peaking - there are several years proposed for global peaking: immediately, 2012, 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2020
• Compared to current level of pledges by developed countries (which is 17 to 25%), even
the lowest proposal 30% will be very difficult to negotiate. The issue also heavily depends on the progress of discussion under the AWG KP Chapter I (Commitments of
Annex I Parties) where there is currently no significant change in positions and it will
need political decision on very high level. http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/ad_hoc_working_groups/lca/application/pdf/20111006_sv_1930.pdf