Table summarising Parties’ ADP submissions (January to March 2014)

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 However, the materials have been prepared for informational purposes only and may have been superseded by more recent developments.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: 11/03/2014

China
  • Aim is not to renegotiate the Convention but to strengthen its multilateral rule-based regime.
  • Work shall be guided by the Convention principles, in particular CBDR/RC.
  • Keep existing differentiation between developed and developing country Parties; developed country Parties to take the lead in reducing GHG emissions and honouring obligations to provide technology and financial support to developing country Parties; commitments by developed country Parties on providing finance, technology and capacity-building shall be of the same legal bindingness as their mitigation commitments.
  • Developed country Parties to take commitments on economy-wide targets for absolute quantified emission reduction below their 1990 levels; targets be internationally legally binding, comparable among all developed country Parties and cover all sectors and all greenhouse gases.
  • Targets to be reflected in an attachment to the agreement and relevant information to be communicated through a common template (based on BAP format).
  • Support a diversity of enhanced mitigation actions by developing country Parties, including emission intensity targets, deviation from BAU and low-carbon, in accordance with specific needs and special circumstances.
  • All Parties to take enhanced actions on adaptation; developed country Parties to increase their commitments on providing finance, technology and capacity-building support to developing countries to implement adaptation activities.
  • Institutional arrangements on adaptation to be elaborated by improving collaboration between the adaptation mechanism and other arrangements under the Convention and through increased funding for adaptation under the GCF.
  • Developed country Parties to promote and finance access to technologies to developing country Parties, by removing obstacles such as IPRs, and by supporting research.
  • Institutional arrangements on technology to be further elaborated by improving the collaboration between the technology mechanism and other Convention arrangements.
  • All Parties to enhance their action on capacity-building, with developed countries providing support to developing countries, and institutional arrangements to be elaborated by establishing an international mechanism on capacity building and a window for capacity-building under the GCF.
  • Developed countries to provide new, additional, adequate, predictable and sustained finance to support developing country Parties in the post-2020 period.
  • There should be a clear roadmap on scaling up financial support with specific targets, timelines and sources.
  • Institutional arrangements on finance, especially for the GCF, to be further elaborated in order to enhance financial support to developing country Parties through adequate and secured funding by developed country Parties to the GCF with at least 1% of their GDP per year from 2020.
  • Developed country Parties commitments on finance, technology and capacity-building to be reflected in an attachment to the agreement.
  • Developed country Parities to enhance the MRV of mitigation and finance, technology and capacity-building support to developing country Parties based on the National Communication, BR and IAR and KP.
  • Supported by developed country Parties, developing country Parties to increase the transparency of their enhanced actions through National Communication, BUR, registry and ICA in a non-intrusive manner and respecting sovereignty.
  • Increasing pre-2020 ambition shall be achieved through the implementation of CP2 and the Agreed Outcome pursuant to the BAP. Specifically: all developed country Parties of the Kyoto Protocol to ratify the Doha Amendment no later than 31 December 2014; developed country Parties participating in CP2 shall increase their QELRCs to 40% below their 1990 levels by 2020; developed country Parties that are not part of CP2 shall also increase their comparable mitigation commitments under the Convention within the same timeframe; developed country Parties to submit a clear roadmap to ratchet up their financial support during the period of 2014 to 2020.
EUEU Priorities for 2014

  • Countries to speed up process of developing meaningful mitigation commitments – come forward with mitigation commitments well in advance and by the 1st quarter of 2015.
  • Requirements for “upfront” information are agreed
  • Progress made on collective view on how proposed commitments will be considered.
  • Progress towards rules based 2015 Agreement – in particular in relation to MRV, accounting and compliance.
  • Progress made on how implementation and adaptation will be reflected in 2015 Agreement.
  • First draft text by COP 20.

Elements of 2015 Agreement

  • Should be a new protocol under Convention, part of a wider 2015 package, including a series of accompanying COP decisions and able to endure well beyond 2020.
  • Aim to address 100% of global greenhouse gases.
  • All parties should have legally binding mitigation commitments.  Commitments must reflect changed and changing responsibilities and capabilities of Parties.
  • Collective ambition must keep on track of below 2 degrees.
  • 2015 Agreement should enhance adaption actions, enhancing national efforts of Parties through its provisions.
  • Agreement should consider ways to further enhance the mobilisation of climate finance.

Up Front Information regarding proposed mitigation commitment

  • The EU suggests the kinds of upfront information for all commitment types, and additional information.
  • Defining up front information requirements does not imply dealing with new or additional information requirements, but with information that Parties will already need to consider for the preparation of post 2020 domestic mitigation commitments.
  • Need for rule based regime – strengthening rules around MRV, accounting, and compliance important to build confidence in a new regime.
LMDCComments on Guiding Principles

  • Equity is a central element of the ADP mandate. This must be reflected in a balance CBDR, i.e. the extent to which developing countries will implement their commitments depends on effective implementation by developed countries of their commitments related to financial resources and technology transfer.

Substantive provisions on elements for 2015 agreed outcome

Enhanced action on mitigation

  • Mitigation efforts for Annex I parties must be specific, enhanced, comparable QELRCs.
  • Mitigation actions for non-Annex I parties should be determined nationally in accordance with specific needs and circumstances supported by finance and technology from Annex II parties.

Enhanced action on adaption

  • Need a process to support NAPS in interested developing countries with adequate support.
  • Existing adaption-related institutions under the Convention should be strengthened and fully financed, with provisions committing Annex II parties through the Green Climate Fund.

Enhanced action to address loss and damage

  • Need a provision incorporating Loss and Damage mechanism established at COP19, with the mechanism to be financed and operationalised by Annex II parties. Must address extreme weather events and slow onset events, including by establishing social safety nets.

Enhanced action on finance

  • Annex II aggregate commitment of USD70 billion per year by 2016, rising to USD100 billion per year by 2020, leading to increased commitment for post-2020 period. Financing by Annex II parties should relate to climate financing needs of non-Annex I parties.
  • Must develop a robust mechanism for MRV of support provided to developing countries.

Enhanced action on technology development and transfer

  • Support enhancing action on technology development and transfer by having Annex II parties pursue the removal of barrier, including IPRs by establishing an international mechanism on IPRs, and providing financial support.
  • Need a provision to enable Annex II parties to commit resources to support mitigation and adaption technology development in developing countries.

Enhanced action on capacity building

  • Capacity building should be demand-driven and based on needs of developing countries, and be financed and supported by Annex II parties. Provisions should also include the establishment of an international mechanism funded by the GCF. There could also be an evaluation mechanism to assess effectiveness of the delivery of capacity building.

Enhanced action on transparency

  • Transparency of action and support is key, but differentiated between developed and developing countries. Need enhanced procedures for comparability of Annex I parties’ mitigation commitments.
  • Enhanced transparency is needed in relation to provision of support to developing countries.
Norway
  • In relation to mitigation there should be commitments from all parties, governed by common multilateral rules, with flexibility for implementation, differentiation according to national circumstances, and contributions to global effort.
  • Upfront information needs to provide clarity, transparency and understanding as this information will assist in holding parties accountable later
  • Support for national, regional, and international carbon markets.
  • Support differentiated responsibility and capabilities – but differentiate according to the actual differences of Parties, and not based on fixed categories of Parties. An approach is to ask Parties in their submissions to clarify how their contribution is ambitious and equitable.  These mitigation contributions should be formulated as firm commitments in the final agreement
  • Information should be done with common metrics.  If possible, both emissions by sources and removals by sinks should be specified.
  • As a minimum up front information should include information asked for in the 2020 pledges, such as base year, scope (coverage of gases and sectors, percentage of emissions covered), global warming potential values, role of LULUFC, and of carbon credits.  Also should provide clarity on assumptions and methodologies.
  • A stock-take of progress in Parties’ preparations at June meeting could be useful to build trust and share experiences.

Quantified and Quantifiable Emissions Reductions

  • Best case – all parties with significant proportion of global emissions have economy-wide emissions reductions or limitation commitments. Others need to specify assumptions and methodologies and that the contribution can be fixed over the time period established for the commitments.
  • Some parties could consider approach of stepwise or phased approaches to commitments, according to national circumstances.
  • Emissions reduction should be unconditional of financial support
  • Because parties may have different mitigation commitments, with different scope and depth, need for flexibility in appropriate reporting and measuring of progress.
  • But there should be common international approach in three areas: how to estimate and report emissions; common framework in how to account for emissions and removals from forest and land use (LULUFC); and rules and frameworks for use of market based mechanisms, to prevent double claiming of credits
  • Carbon markets should be included to allow Parties to meet commitments, under conditions to ensure no double claiming

Collective international assessment/consultation process

  • Norway envisages an initial process before the agreement is finalised to ensure a good understanding of the contributions submitted.  A review process could look at the information and how it fits into the broader picture and assist with time frames and what the agreement would deliver.
  • Once agreement has taken effect, necessary for regular review process built into the agreement itself.
Switzerland
  • COP decisions should operationalize the 2015 agreement, providing further guidance under the 2015 Agreement, and the nationally determined contributions
  • Seeks for the preamble to acknowledge each party’s evolving nature of responsibilities, capabilities, needs, special circumstances and specific conditions.
  • Parties must commit to reductions that are quantifiable and unconditional.
  • Parties must provide the authority to the COP to adopt any further guidance on the arrangements and process from presentation to anchoring of Parties’ commitments and on the formulation of commitments
  • Parties should have a common understanding of the length of the period to be covered by the Agreement, which in Switzerland’s view should be the same for all parties.
  • Agreement should acknowledge that economy-wide emission reduction commitments quantified in terms of GHGs provide the highest level of clarity and predictability.
  • Agreement should cover all sectors and gases causing high GHG emissions.
  • Agreement should include provisions so that parties can present all relevant information on the factual information and assumptions on which their commitments are based.
  • Agreement should include provisions for common accounting approaches to be used by all parties, which will ensure environmental integrity by excluding double accounting of emission reductions and facilitating transparency and comparability.
  • Agreement should include provisions for common regular reporting and verification.
  • Agreement should be dynamic to allow for regular review of the adequacy of the global ambition in stabilizing GHG emissions and include provisions that allow parties to make subsequent commitments over time.
  • With respect to adaptation, the Agreement should reflect parties’ commitment to preparing for integrated planning and action, party cooperation and sharing information regarding progress and experiences.
  • The Agreement should include a commitment from Parties that are able to do so, to cooperate and support countries in need through a variety of means, including financial resources, technology development and transfer and capacity building.  Parties should regularly report on their provision, receipt and use of support resources for climate action intended to support the Agreement
  • Agreement should reflect the importance of climate friendly investments and environments stimulating mobilization of public and private climate finance.
  • The Convention’s financial mechanism should serve as the financial mechanism for the 2015 agreement
Ukraine
  • Supports a “Bottom Up” Principle of establishing commitments – each party should independently determine reasonable proposals of their emissions.
  • National efforts taken by all countries on the basis of factors such as “national circumstances, indicators of social and economic development, mitigation opportunities, financial capability, etc.
  • Countries’ previous mitigation actions during entire action period of UNFCCC should be considered during formation of the new global agreement.
  • Legally binding commitments are necessary.
  • Major GHG emitters should be quantified with clear schedule of achieving targets.
  • Land use, land-use change and forestry in the mitigation sector should be considered an essential part of the overall target and included in parties’ commitments.
  • New Agreement should stipulate the functioning and development of the flexible Kyoto mechanisms and new market and non-market instruments of commitments
  • New Agreement should include strict rules and procedures on accounting, which should be applied to all parties.
  • Adaptation is key element of any new Agreement as well as international cooperation in this regard.
USA
  • Supports the principles of the Convention (including, but not limited to CBDR/RC).  However, do not support current bifurcated approach as views this as outdated and not reflecting dramatic and dynamic shifts in countries’ emissions and economic profiles
  • See the Agreement as part of a larger package adopted in Paris, and the Agreement should “built to last”
  • In relation to mitigation, Parties should each create and maintain a “schedule” regarding its contribution to limiting/reducing GHG emissions
    • Contributions “nationally determined”, initial contributions relate to a common timeframe, contributions should be specific, and generally expressed in quantifiable terms.
    • Support for REDD+ in schedules
    • External financing to continue – but general expectation that a Party’s listed contribution not conditional on external support.
    • A party would need to submit its schedule before joining the Convention
    • Preferable the schedules follow a notional format, and housed separately (e.g. by the secretariat).
  • Schedules to be accompanied with information that ensures clarity.
  • Agreement should contain requirement on Parties to periodically report on progress in implementing schedule.
  • Accounting provisions should be included applying to all Parties, and standardise approaches used for LULUFC, market mechanism.
  • Schedules should be able to be reviewed.  Details of the reviews should be set forth in a decision.
  • The Agreement should integrate adaptation into national planning; undertake assessments of impacts and vulnerability; prioritise the most vulnerable communities; understanding costs and benefits at a local level; strengthen governance and enabling environments for adaption; monitor report, evaluation and learn from adaptation plans, policies and programs.
  • Agreement should stress importance of international cooperation in relation to adaptation
  • In relation to finance, need to maximise impact of public sector resources by focusing on targeting forms of assistance that incentivizes private sector engagement, with a necessary focus on “pull” and “push” factors (i.e creative attractive investment opportunities).
  • Institutional provisions should reflect the Kyoto Protocol
Uzbekistan
  • Favors common but differentiated responsibility with determination of each country’s capacity to prevent climate change based on the socioeconomic development of each country.
  • Agreement should be wider than Kyoto Protocol and monitor emissions of key emitters separately.
  • Increased financing opportunities via Green Climate Fund are critical to developing national strategies on climate change prevention. Such financing activities should be transparent to all parties.
  • Agreement must balance resources between adaptation and mitigation.
  • Favors the strengthening of existing and creation of new, financial mechanisms aimed at prevention and adaptation as well as technology transfer and capacity building.  Current barriers to technology transfer should be eliminated.
AILAC
  • The new agreement must be legally binding
  • The new agreement should clearly reflect the link between climate change and development options.  In climate change vulnerable developing countries, climate change impacts undermine sustainable development efforts.  Poverty eradication efforts are undermined.
  • The climate friendly economy is about addressing development needs while mitigating GHG emissions so as to avoid catastrophic climate change.
  • The agreement should be drafted so as to avoid renegotiation in the future and be necessarily flexible to take into account parties’ evolving and specific circumstances
  • Functional draft text is needed by COP20 Lima

Mitigation

  • Provisions on mitigation should refer to the global mitigation goal, a mechanism to determine legally binding nationally determined contributions, what information is required in a parties’ statement of commitment, provisions relating to support and finance, market and non-market mechanisms, and a review mechanisms for contributions
  • Mitigation provisions should take into account that universality of application does not mean uniformity
  • Contributions should be nationally determined and support given to those countries who need it the most and are willing to go beyond their capacity.
  • Leadership on mitigation needs to come from developed countries
  • Contribution of REDD+ to global climate change mitigation efforts should be substantial and enhanced. REDD+ should be included in ADP workstream 1 and 2
  • Agreement needs to be reached on funding in the pre-2020 timeframe

Adaptation and loss and damage

  • Adaptation is a matter of collective responsibility and are central to development efforts of developing countries
  • Loss and damage should be addressed by the Convention and the new agreement
  • An adaptation assessment framework must be established under the Convention
  • Strengthen adaptation by further advancing metrics
  • There is a need for enhance financial, technical and scientific support for countries to undertake NAPS

Means of implementation

  • Include provision on the national responsibility of all countries to mobilise and invest resources in climate friendly actions at the national level
  • Connect historical responsibility of developed countries with provision of climate finance to developing countries

Transparency of action and support

  • Specific transparency rules on including on nationally determined contributions and a mechanism of periodic review

Compliance mechanism

  • Include a robust compliance mechanism
  • Need for workshops to advance ADP’s work