The document discusses the purposes of reporting tables for cooperative approaches under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. It notes that paragraph 77(d) requires parties using cooperative approaches to provide specific information on emissions and transfers of mitigation outcomes. An effective reporting table design should fulfill the requirements of 77(d) while promoting transparency, accuracy and understanding of nation climate actions. It suggests that the most robust design presented still lacks some key information required by 77(d) and does not enable reporting on all important issues. Separating details on cooperative approaches into dedicated tables could improve readability while ensuring consistency between negotiation workstreams.

1. Session 4: Transparency
discussion
Article 6, ITMOs, CORSIA
Virtual CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change
April 2020

2. What are the purpose(s) of
reporting tables on the use of
cooperative approaches?

3. The broad possibilities
1. To demonstrate/help others understand a Party’s NDC implementation and achievement, for
compliance purposes under the Paris Agreement and to enhance mutual trust across Parties;
2. Promote TACCC principles: the format of a structured summary may have important
consequences on whether the information provided by Parties will be comparable, consistent
or transparent;
3. Facilitate the review of the information reported by Parties by the Technical Expert Review
(TER) and help TER in its “consideration of the Party’s implementation and achievement of its
NDC under Article 4 of the Paris Agreement”;
4. Help a Party identify if its actions to meet its NDC are on track;
5. To help others to identify promising climate responses; Parties could demonstrate (during the
implementation period) the effect of a Party’s implementation of its NDC, i.e. not only that the
Party is taking steps to implement its NDC, but that these steps are having the intended effect;
6. To contribute (both during and after NDC implementation periods) to collective assessments in
the context of the global stocktake under the UNFCCC, in which case quantitative information
could be needed.

4. The infamous 77 (d)
• Each Party that participates in cooperative approaches that involve
the use of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes towards an
NDC under Article 4, or authorizes the use of mitigation outcomes for
international mitigation purposes other than achievement of its
NDC, shall also provide the following information in the structured
summary consistently with relevant decisions adopted by the CMA on
Article 6:

5. The infamous 77 (d)
• (i) The annual level of anthropogenic emissions by sources and
removals by sinks covered by the NDC on an annual basis reported
biennially;
• (ii) An emissions balance reflecting the level of anthropogenic
emissions by sources and removals by sinks covered by its NDC
adjusted on the basis of corresponding adjustments undertaken by
effecting an addition for internationally transferred mitigation
outcomes first-transferred/transferred and a subtraction for
internationally transferred mitigation outcomes used/acquired,
consistent with decisions adopted by the CMA on Article 6;

6. The infamous 77 (d)
• (iii) Any other information consistent with decisions adopted by the
CMA on reporting under Article 6;
• (iv) Information on how each cooperative approach promotes
sustainable development; and ensures environmental integrity and
transparency, including in governance; and applies robust accounting
to ensure inter alia the avoidance of double counting, consistent with
decisions adopted by the CMA on Article 6.

7. The infamous 77 (d) X The broad possibilities
1. To demonstrate/help others understand a Party’s NDC implementation and achievement, for
compliance purposes under the Paris Agreement and to enhance mutual trust across Parties;
2. Promote TACCC principles: the format of a structured summary may have important
consequences on whether the information provided by Parties will be comparable, consistent
or transparent;
3. Facilitate the review of the information reported by Parties by the Technical Expert Review
(TER) and help TER in its “consideration of the Party’s implementation and achievement of its
NDC under Article 4 of the Paris Agreement”;
4. Help a Party identify if its actions to meet its NDC are on track;
5. To help others to identify promising climate responses; Parties could demonstrate (during the
implementation period) the effect of a Party’s implementation of its NDC, i.e. not only that the
Party is taking steps to implement its NDC, but that these steps are having the intended effect;
6. To contribute (both during and after NDC implementation periods) to collective assessments in
the context of the global stocktake under the UNFCCC, in which case quantitative information
could be needed.

8. How can reporting tables best
serve these purposes?

9. The implications
• Para 77 (d) is not only a “shall” requirement for “each Party that participates in cooperative approaches”, it is
a practical necessity for a transparent, accurate understanding of NDC implementation and achievement.
• Parties interested in participating, but unable to meet requirement should be provided all the support necessary enable
their participation.
• Only the most robust CTF design presented in the input paper provides prompts for nearly (but not quite)
enough information to fulfill the mandates under 77(d).
• It also provides prompts for information not required under 77 (d) which may further increase complexity.
• Robust features include, a common structured summary, a quantitative target for CAs and tracking
achievement indicators throughout the implementation period, among others.
• These still do not provide for transparent reporting on issues that are critical to a variety of Parties such as
SD, OMGE and SOP/adaptation finance, among others. They also do not provide for non-CO2e metrics.
• Further reporting vehicles/instances, infrastructure and processes are needed to ensure A6 delivers on its
potential to support, and not to undermine the Paris Agreement. This can not be developed in the
transparency negotiations alone.
• Support breaking off A6 details table(s) from other CTF tables, allowing the structured summary to retain
basic A6 info with clear link to details table(s).
• This would improve readability and provide a designated space for A6 and A13 to interact, minimizing the
risk of stalling all of A13 while ensuring consistency between work streams.

10. ¡Gracias!
Felipe De León Denegri
felipe@climatrader.com
@felipe_deleon