Analysis of agenda item on methodological issues under the KP

Legal assistance paper

All reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of this information at the time the advice was produced. However, the materials have been prepared for informational purposes only and may have been superseded by more recent developments. They do not constitute formal legal advice or create a lawyer- client relationship. To the extent permitted any liability is excluded. Those consulting the database may wish to contact LRI for clarifications and an updated analysis.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Date produced: 16/11/2013

Can you explain the context and relevance of both the legal and technical aspects of agenda item 12(a) on methodological issues under KP: “implications of the implementation of decision 2/CMP7 to 4/CMP.7 and 1/CMP8 on the previous decisions on methodological issues related to KP including those relating to Articles 5,7 and 8 of KP”?

Summary: This agenda item relates to the technical changes that are required to be made to the modalities and procedures for the Kyoto Protocol (the Marrakesh Accords) in order to implement the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. In addition, Parties may consider issues arising from the implementation of the first commitment period that may be beneficial to address.

Advice:

This agenda item relates to the technical changes that are required to be made to the modalities and procedures for the Kyoto Protocol (the Marrakesh Accords) in order to implement the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. In addition, Parties may consider issues arising from the implementation of the first commitment period that may be beneficial to address.

Following the adoption of Decision 1/CMP 8 and 2/ CMP 8 in Doha, Parties have put forward submissions on, and have held workshops to discuss, the range of amendments which could be made to the Marrakesh Accords.  The secretariat prepared a technical paper in October 2013 (FCCC/TP/2013/9) which elaborates on the various approaches that can be taken to give effect to the required changes.

The key issues under consideration are:

Addressing references to decisions, the Articles to the Kyoto Protocol, IPCC methodologies for estimating anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks, gases and the commitment period. Most of these references simply require clarification for the different commitment period and can be addressed through a list of references to be considered when establishing the rules valid for each commitment period;

Addressing the implications of decisions 2/CMP.7 to 4/CMP.7, 1/CMP.8 and 2/CMP.8 on issues requiring a consideration of their substantive implications. The issues included in this category have been divided as follows:

Calculation of the initial assigned amount and review of the initial report to facilitate the calculation of the assigned amount for the second commitment period;

Addressing the implications of decisions 2/CMP.7 to 4/CMP.7, 1/CMP.8 and 2/CMP.8 on issues requiring a consideration of their substantive implications. The issues included in this category have been divided as follows:

  • Calculation of the initial assigned amount and review of the initial report to facilitate the calculation of the assigned amount for the second commitment period;
  • Carry-over and previous period surplus reserve accounts;
  • Section G (Article 3, paragraph 7 ter) of the Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol (methodological issues associated in calculating the difference between the assigned amount of the second commitment period for a party and average annual emissions for the first three years of the preceding commitment period multiplied by 8, which shall be transferred to a cancellation account);
  • Share of proceeds;
  • Any increases in ambition as referred to in decision 1/CMP.8, paragraphs 7 and 8, and Article 3, paragraphs 1 ter and quater, in the Doha Amendment;
  • The clarification of reporting requirements for Parties included in Annex I to the Convention (Annex I Parties) without a quantified emission limitation and reduction commitment (QELRC) for the second commitment period.

Technical Paper 9 provides further detail on each of these items and puts forward various options for Parties to consider with respect to the substance and form of the amendments.

There are a number of different ways in which the amendments, once agreed, can be reflected.  Those options include:

(a) An overarching decision: a decision that would list all the necessary modifications for the implementation of methodological decisions in the second commitment period;

(b) An overarching decision plus new decisions: new decisions would be agreed for the methodological issues that would imply a large number of changes in the existing decisions; these new decisions would, for the second commitment period, replace the relevant existing CMP 1 decisions. The new decisions and their annexes would be attached to an overarching decision;

(c) ‘Mutatis mutandis’ approach: relevant existing decisions in place for the first commitment period would be referenced for application mutatis mutandis for the second commitment period, with any necessary changes or additions reflected in replacement paragraphs or new paragraphs presented below the appropriate headings.

To date in the SBSTA negotiations, Parties have had only limited time to consider the specifics of the possible amendments outlined in the Technical Paper. When SBSTA concludes on 16 November 2013, the contact group on this item may request the SBSTA Chair to ask for the matter to be continued under the umbrella of the CMP agenda.  This would provide further time for consideration of the item.