4122              Developed countries condition future of the Kyoto                                 ProtocolBonn, 9 June (...
TWN Bonn Update No. 13                                                                          10 June 2011their conditio...
TWN Bonn Update No. 13                                                                            10 June 2011Brazil said ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Kyoto

618

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
618
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Kyoto"

  1. 1. 4122 Developed countries condition future of the Kyoto ProtocolBonn, 9 June (Lim Li Lin) - The contact group phase of emission reductions under the Kyotomeetings of the Ad hoc Working Group on Further Protocol, while other developed countries haveCommitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto attached conditions to their further commitments. AsProtocol (AWG-KP) commenced on Wednesday, 8 such, the work of the AWG-KP is uncertain, withJune with serious disagreements between Annex I developing countries working towards a second(developed country) and non-Annex I (developing commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, and somecountry) Parties on the future of the Kyoto Protocol developed countries working to shift the outcomes ofand the way forward towards Durban (where the next the work of the AWG-KP into the AWG-LCA (Ad-UN climate change conference will be held in hoc Working Group on Long-term cooperativeNovember). Action) outcome.Canada became the third Annex I Party to declare in The meetings followed on from the last session inBonn that it will not commit to a second Bangkok in April. At that session, developingcommitment period after 2012 under the Kyoto countries led by Tuvalu and St Lucia insisted that theProtocol, just as Russia and Japan have done at work of the AWG-KP not move into technicalprevious sessions. discussions in small spin-off groups until the political issues around the future of the Kyoto Protocol andWhile developing countries firmly insist that for a its second commitment period are resolved. Mostbalanced Durban outcome, developed countries must countries supported continuing this politicalcommit to a second commitment period under the discussion at the opening of the AWG-KP onKyoto Protocol, developed countries are trying to lay Tuesday, 7 June.the foundations for a new agreement that wouldinclude all “major emitters” (which would include The discussion at the last session in Bangkok hadcommitments from the United States as well as focused around the conditionalities that developed“advanced developing countries”). countries have attached to their emission reduction pledges. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)(The United States, which is not Party to the Kyoto had put forward a number of questions, on what pre-Protocol, had in Bangkok last April, made clear that it conditions have been met and need to be met incould not support an international regime that would order for Annex I Parties to move forward with aset top-down rules for emission reduction targets and second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.consequences for non-compliance.) The Chair, Adrian Macey from New Zealand,Developed countries also insist on the need for proposed at the start of the contact group that theagreement on the technical accounting rules regarding meeting should discuss policy issues on thetheir emission reduction pledges before or at the conditionalities and linkages that Annex I Parties aresame time that commitments can be made, and making with regards to the second commitmentthreatened that if work on the rules does not take period, as well as to advance the negotiating text, soplace in Bonn, it will be almost certain that there will that there is greater clarity on the issues for politicalbe no second commitment period under the Kyoto decisions in Durban.Protocol. St Lucia, supported by Bolivia, expressed doubt thatDeveloping countries on the other hand have the Chair’s proposal for work would help achieve thecontinued to insist that it is important to understand clarity desired. It said that three Parties havethe context of the discussions in the AWG-KP. This expressed their lack of interest in the secondis because some countries (Canada, Russia and Japan) commitment period, and this should be taken note of,have declared that they will not commit to a second and the work should focus on the other Parties and
  2. 2. TWN Bonn Update No. 13 10 June 2011their conditionalites. (This sentiment was also It later added that its conditions are a clearsupported by Brazil Singapore, Zambia, and Cuba.) understanding of the rules, implementation of theThen, the timing of political decision-making should MRV package based on the modalities and guidelinesalso be determined. Tuvalu advocated for a more that were agreed in Cancun, and that the futurespecific discussion on the conditionalities, beyond regime must make sense, be clear, comparable,generalities. comprehensive, fair, coherent, and effective.The European Union, supported by Switzerland Canada announced that it will not be taking anand Australia suggested asking what a successful, emission reduction target under the secondbalanced package for Durban would look like, and commitment period, but said that this does not meanwhat role the second commitment period would play that it will not engage. It said that the Kyoto Protocolin that, rather than framing the issue as a question rules and structures can be useful in the context of aabout conditionalities. more comprehensive agreement, for example land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) rules inIt said that the second commitment period should be the context of REDD-plus (Reducing emissions frompart of a balanced package for Durban. If this is deforestation and forest degradation in developingagreed then the focus should be on what needs to be countries) and market mechanisms.done with regards to the rules, as rules are neededbefore the numbers can be put in a legal New Zealand referred to “commonalities andcommitment. conditionalities”, and said that every Annex I country is ready to take commitments in “appropriate legalIt said that excluding some countries from the form”. It said that there was a lot of commonality onnegotiating process was squarely against the comparability, common rules, and coherence with themultilateral process, as all Parties, even the non- AWG-LCA. It asked what are the conditionalities ofKyoto Protocol Party is welcome, and should be part non-Annex I countries? For example, the demandsof the discussion, as maybe there could be a package for 40 % emission reductions (by 2020 on 1990that could be attractive to them. levels) is unlikely to be achieved, and would this beThe Russian Federation said that if there is a unacceptable? It said that conditions relate to thesecond commitment period, the regime will be much targets and the rules, while conditionalities are moreclumsier, and will not have environmental integrity. It political, for example the global context andsaid that it wanted to be part of a comprehensive contribution from all major emitters.regime, and to take commitments, in the manner that Norway said that it can consider a secondwas confirmed with the Copenhagen Accord and commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, asreiterated in Cancun. It suggested that the Durban part of a balanced outcome in Durban. It said that itsoutcome could formalize in a decision the emission level of ambition is to reduce emissions by 30% byreduction pledges, as well as the rules, for example on 2020 on 1990 levels, and that it was willing to increaseMRV (measurement, reporting and verification) and its emission reductions by 40% if others do more. Itcomparability of efforts. This would make its is flexible whether or not it commits under the Kyotoimplementation possible from legal point of view, it Protocol, or as part of a new outcome. It said that thesaid. elements of the Kyoto Protocol should be kept in aIt also expressed its extreme surprise with proposals future legal agreement, and that the Kyoto Protocol(to move forward in the discussion with only those alone is not enough for an environmentallycountries that are willing to consider a second meaningful outcome. Its conditions are that thecommitment period). It said this was not legally Cancun agreements are implemented, clear progressjustifiable or politically acceptable, and Parties cannot on mitigation and coherent MRV for developed andbe excluded. developing countries especially for major emitters,Switzerland said that Cancun was a starting point, surplus assigned amount units (AAUs) addressed, andand that it is important to look at the deliverables in accounting rules adopted together with the agreementthe broader package. In this regard, progress must be on the second commitment period.made on all the areas. The bridge must land in one Japan said that it had a strong aspiration for a newcomprehensive legally binding regime, embracing all legal framework in which all major economiesmajor emitters, it said. It requested that the AWG- participate. It reiterated its position that it would notLCA workshop report on developing country commit to a second commitment period under themitigation should also be made available to the Kyoto Protocol. It said that there is an accumulationAWG-KP. of lessons and experience on the implementation of(Developing countries are not required to take the Kyoto Protocol, which is an important structureemission reduction commitments under the Kyoto for emission reductions, and provides the buildingProtocol.) blocks towards a new framework. 2
  3. 3. TWN Bonn Update No. 13 10 June 2011Brazil said that the second commitment period must Canada said that it was seeking a legal agreement thatbe adopted in Durban to ensure that there is no gap includes commit from all major emitters. The Cancunbetween the commitment periods. It said that issues agreements is a good framework, it said.under the AWG-LCA should not be considered. Tuvalu agreed with St Lucia and pressed for moreSingapore said that the second commitment period specificities in the conditionalities discussion. Itis a critical part of the balanced package under the clarified that all Parties have the legal right to speaktwo-track process which was agreed in Bali. and have an input, however the inputs of those that do not want to be a Party to the second commitmentArgentina said that the AWG-KP is the place to period must be considered in that context, as theirdiscuss the second commitment period, not vague inputs have no relevance to the second commitmentideas about the future. This sentiment was echoed by period. It said that during the negotiations of theChina and Saudi Arabia, who stressed on the mandate Kyoto Protocol itself, the same thing happened, andof the AWG-KP. those mistakes should not be repeated. It also askedDemocratic Republic of Congo said that there is a what is the legal form of the other elements of thelack of political will from Annex I Parties. It asked package, for example for the United States’ mitigationhow to expect an outcome in Durban if there is no commitment. This question was not responded to.second commitment period, and how can The EU, supported by Switzerland, Norway, Newconditionalities and commonalities be placed and Zealand, Colombia and Peru proposed that spin-expect Durban to be a success? off groups on technical issues should be held, even asCuba added that it was only willing to consider the the political issues continue to be discussed. Newflexible mechanism under the second commitment Zealand said that if there are no rules, we can beperiod of the Kyoto Protocol, and not under the confident that they will not be applied in the secondAWG-LCA. commitment period. The EU said that if we continueAt the second meeting of the contact group, the deep without the technical discussion, it saw no possibilitydisagreement between developed and developing that it would be ready to adopt a second commitmentcountries continued and remained unresolved. The period.Chair proposed taking forward issues in the text, and St Lucia, Tuvalu, Argentina, Bolivia, and Saudiin spin-off groups. Arabia opposed moving into spin-off groups forSt Lucia insisted that it was difficult to get into technical discussions before the political issues aretechnical issues, as the political context frames the resolved.way we approach these issues. It asked to hear from Algeria said that a work programme should bemore Parties, and requested for a number of specific adopted in order to adopt a final decision on theclarifications from Annex I Parties based on what second commitment period in Durban, based on thethey said in the first contact group meeting. mandate in Article 3.9 of the Kyoto Protocol.In response to a question posed by St Lucia, New Bolivia said that the AWG-KP must fulfill itsZealand explained that its ideal legal form is a single mandate in Article 3.9, and work on how to increasetreaty with advanced developing countries, and this the level of ambition with regards to emissionmay be appropriate in the long term. In the interim, reduction numbers.there needs to be a transition period, and there could The Vice Chair, Madeleine Diouf Sarr from Senegal,be two tracks that are balanced and equally legally proposed a legal group to be convened on Friday. Inbinding. This could include the prospect of a second the end, it was agreed that the Chair would consult oncommitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. It said whether to convene the legal and spin-off groups.that a balanced package at Durban would include allthe elements of the current negotiations in The Chair concluded the contact group meeting byappropriate legal form. It urged for work on the text, saying that it is very difficult to get political clarityand for identifying the political issues for Ministers in first, as political clarity is what you get in the deal, andDurban. the deal is for Durban. If we continue to seek political clarity, it may be more difficult to reach at the end.Australia said that its vision for a new climate regime He suggested moving forward in an iterative way. Inis a legally binding treaty, where mitigation Bangkok, the space was created for politicalcommitments by all major economies are anchored. discussion, and now the group could also start toDurban will be a step towards that vision. It said that examine proposals in the text, he said.that there should be a solid mechanism to bring thelevel of ambition up, and the institutions andstructures should be brought to life. 3

×