Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Global Environmental Governance: Copenhagen Accord
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Global Environmental Governance: Copenhagen Accord

457

Published on

The Copenhagen Agreement is a document that delegates at the 15th session of the Conference of Parties (COP 15) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to "take note of" at …

The Copenhagen Agreement is a document that delegates at the 15th session of the Conference of Parties (COP 15) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to "take note of" at the final plenary on 18 December 2009.

The Accord, drafted by, on the one hand, the United States and on the other, in a united position as the BASIC countries (China, India, South Africa, and Brazil), is not legally binding and does not commit countries to agree to a binding successor to the Kyoto Protocol, whose round ended in 2012.

Published in: Environment
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
457
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. I. Introduction  Preconditions for holding COP 15;  2009 UN Climate Change Conference; II. Copenhagen Accord  Major goals of Copenhagen Accord  Protest actions around the world;  Good and weak points of CA;  Further steps: 2010 Cancun Summit, Mexico III. Conclusion  Propositions;  Resources;
  • 2.  was held in Copenhagen, Denmark, from 7 December to 18 December, 2009.  attendance by 120 Heads of State and Government of UNFCCC member countries  numbers of participants included 10,500 delegates, 13,500 observers, and coverage by more than 3,000 media representatives  Conference included the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP 15) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 5th Meeting of the Parties (MOP 5) to the Kyoto Protocol.
  • 3. -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 WoldCO2Emissions(GtC) E: 850-1130 ppm CO2-eq D: 710-850 ppm CO2-eq C: 590-710 ppm CO2-eq B: 535-590 ppm CO2-eq A2: 490-535 ppm CO2-eq A1: 445-490 ppm CO2-eq Stabilization targets: Post-SRES (max) Post-SRES (min) Equilibriumglobalmeantemperature increaseoverpreindustrial(°C) GHG concentration stabilization level (ppmv CO2-eq) -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 WoldCO2Emissions(GtC) E: 850-1130 ppm CO2-eq D: 710-850 ppm CO2-eq C: 590-710 ppm CO2-eq B: 535-590 ppm CO2-eq A2: 490-535 ppm CO2-eq A1: 445-490 ppm CO2-eq Stabilization targets: Post-SRES (max) Post-SRES (min) Equilibriumglobalmeantemperature increaseoverpreindustrial(°C) GHG concentration stabilization level (ppmv CO2-eq) Proposed emission cuts by scientists – To limit the global temperature rise to 2 C – For Annex I: 25-40% below the 1990 level in 2020 – For non-Annex I: 15-30% deviation from baseline in 2020 Expectations from Copenhagen During the conference some countries stated what actions they were proposing to take if a binding agreement was achieved. In the end, no such agreement was reached and the actions are instead debated in 2010. Source: IPCC WG3 SPM 2007
  • 4. Summary of COP 15  at some point negotiations were conducted at three levels: technical, ministerial, heads of state/government  5 countries decided the outcome on the margins of the UNFCCC process - US, China, India, South Africa, Brazil  The Copenhagen Accord as a main COP-15 outcome
  • 5.  The Copenhagen Accord was drafted by the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa on December 18,  It was "taken note of", but not "adopted", in a debate of all the participating countries the next day, and it was not passed unanimously.  The document recognized that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of the present day and that actions should be taken to keep any temperature increases to below 2 C.  The Accord states that “We underline that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time…We agree that deep cuts in emissions are required, [and] should cooperate in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible.”
  • 6. Source: IA “Al Jazeera” (Saudi Arabia)
  • 7. Mitigation  Annex I countries: agreement that developed countries will provide adequate and predictable financial, technical and capacity-building support to developing countries.  will commit to quantified economy–wide emission reduction by 2020, with targets submitted to the UNFCCC by 31 January 2010. These targets as well as financing to support developing country climate action, are to be monitored, reported and verified.  Non-Annex I countries: Nationally appropriate mitigation actions subject to domestic measurement, reporting, and verification which will be reported every two years What was included in CA
  • 8. Financing  Provide developing countries with new and additional resources of USD 30 billion for 2010~2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation  Mobilize USD 100 billion a year by 2020 from private, public and other alternative sources  Establish the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund as an operating entity of the financial mechanism Technology transfer  Establish a Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer What was included in CA
  • 9.  Having the US, China, India, Brazil, South Africa and other major developing countries agree to a joint climate agreement for the first time.  All of these countries also making unconditional national pledges to either cut or slow the growth of their emissions and/or implement specific measures to achieve this.  Security agreement on limiting average global temperature increase to 2 deg C or less;  Resolution of the monitoring, reporting and verification issue relating to developing country mitigation action;  Developed countries’ commitment to provide US$30 billion of short-term funding through to 2012 and US$100 billion per annum of long-term funding by 2020, close to the level many had been demanding. The good points of CA
  • 10.  Lack of a long-term global emission reduction goal (e.g. 50% reduction of emissions by 2050).  Lack of both individual and aggregate absolute emission targets for developed countries for 2020.  Lack of relative emission reduction targets for developing countries for 2020 (i.e. deviation from BAU trajectories)  Absence of any reference to a global emissions peaking date, or even a developed country peaking date, meaning that, together with the above, no clear pathway for emissions has been agreed.  No mention to a timetable for concluding a legally binding agreement.  Lack of any obvious mechanism for regularly ratcheting up levels of ambition (apart from the 2015 review). Weak points of CA
  • 11.  119 countries (83% of global emissions), responded to the Jan.31, 2010, deadline of the Copenhagen Accord by submitting plans for reducing emissions.  all 27 members of the EU have pledged to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20% by 2020 from 1990 levels.  The United States formally submitted a letter of association, and aims to have a 17% reduction of emissions from 2005 levels.  The major power bloc of developing countries that emerged and have gained significant recognition from the COP15 – Brazil, South Africa, India, and China (BASIC) – have all pledged admirable reduction targets. Emissions targets taken on under Copenhagen Accord (Jan 31, 2010 deadline)
  • 12. Emissions targets taken on under Copenhagen Accord
  • 13. Emissions targets taken on under Copenhagen Accord Source: Harvard University, Center for the Environment Report 2010
  • 14.  address the substantial gaps in the present proposals (current developed countries pledges account only for reduction -13 to -17% by 2020 compared to 1990, when science requires -25 to -40%)  integrate the elements of the Copenhagen Accord in decision texts, and make them operational, including:  Finance: how to institutionalize the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund? – Strengthening market mechanisms – Mechanisms and frameworks on adaptation, A Road to Cancun: unresolved issues COP 16/CMP 6 (29 November – 10 December, Cancun)
  • 15.  Adopting legally-binding documents to reduce the emission by the UN and its agencies;  Development of the special mechanism of financing the coordinating bodies;  Strengthening: bilateral cooperation & alliances of like- minded countries; Conclusion
  • 16.  Official website of the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen COP 15, 7-19 December 2009 http://unfccc.int/resource;  Kelly-Kate s. Pease, “International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in the Twenty-First Century”, revised edition 3, New Jersey 2009.  Information Agency “Al Jazira”; (Saudia Arabia);  Information Agency “Associated Press” (USA);  Harvard University, Center for the Environment Report 2010;  http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~jfrankel/SpecificTargetsHPICA2 009.doc  Russian Regional Environmental Centre (RREC) Report 2009.
  • 17. Thank you! Questions..

×