Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Report (38)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (20)
- Working Paper (13)
- Contribution to Periodical (7)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Conference Object (1)
Division
The objective of this paper is to analyse and make recommendations on a safeguard system for Article 6 that aims at preventing potential harm that mitigation activities may cause on the ground to local stakeholders and the environment. Following some definitory aspects of what and how to safeguard, the paper analyses a number of safeguard systems and do no harm principles as well as tools to implement them. It then gives an overview on Parties' views on the matter, as uttered in their latest submissions on Art. 6 options, as well as an overview of the references in the UNFCCC's SBSTA Chair's text with respect to sustainable development, safeguards, and human rights issues. The paper closes with recommendations on a possible safeguard system for Article 6.
Implementation of nationally determined contributions : Rebublic of Marshall Islands country report
(2018)
The study analyses the country background, emissions trends, ongoing activities and barriers relating to the implementation of the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of the Republic of Marshall Islands under the UNFCCC. A special emphasis is laid on further mitigation potentials in the fields of transport - especially low-carbon domestic shipping - and waste reduction, disposal and processing.
Technology cooperation : update on the technology mechanism and options for using carbon markets
(2014)
This policy brief provides a general overview on the setup of the UNFCCC's Technology Mechanism, exploring potential synergies between the mechanism and carbon market instruments such as the CDM.
There are two branches of the Technology Mechanism: the Technology Executive Committee (TEC), which is tasked to give political advice, and the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN), providing support and fostering the operationalization of technology transfer. Both institutions strongly focus on capacity building.
The CDM, instead, has contributed to technology transfer in practice. However, the transfer has largely focused on equipment and basic operational knowledge. The transfer of knowledge to adapt, advance and innovate has been limited so far.
Therefore, the two mechanisms could well complement each other. In theory, Programmes of Activities and Standardized Baselines under the CDM could be a means for developing country governments to strategically address financial barriers to technology transfer.
This paper analyses the results of the climate conference in Lima 2014 in the light of the coming climate summit in Paris by the end of this year (COP21). The authors from the Wuppertal Institute make recommendations for the improvement of the current cooperation in the context of the climate convention and they suggest to complement the existing UN regime with a club of forerunner countries in order to provide new breath for international climate policy.
The 2014 United Nations Climate Change Conference had been scheduled from 1 to 12 December in Lima/Peru. While in the run-up to the conference, China and the US in a surprise bilateral move had announced plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions that exceeded expectations, the conference was characterised once again by a deep division between key players from the former so-called "developed" and "developing" world. The negotiations thus took 32 hours longer than planned and ended on Sunday morning at 1.22 am. More importantly, the conference failed almost completely to resolve the tasks it was supposed to do in order to prepare the last round of negotiations before next year's conference in Paris 2015, which is supposed to deliver a comprehensive future climate agreement. A team of researchers from the Wuppertal Institute attended the conference and have compiled a first assessment of the results.
The Paris Agreement (PA) emphasizes the intrinsic relationship between climate change and sustainable development (SD) and welcomes the 2030 agenda for the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet, there is a lack of assessment approaches to ensure that climate and development goals are achieved in an integrated fashion and trade-offs avoided. Article 6.4 of the PA introduces a new Sustainable Mitigation Mechanism (SMM) with the dual aim to contribute to the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and foster SD. The Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has a similar objective and in 2014, the CDM SD tool was launched by the Executive Board of the CDM to highlight the SD benefits of CDM activities. This article analyses the usefulness of the CDM SD tool for stakeholders and compares the SD tool's SD reporting requirements against other flexible mechanisms and multilateral standards to provide recommendations for improvement. A key conclusion is that the Paris Agreement's SMM has a stronger political mandate than the CDM to measure that SD impacts are "real, measurable and long-term". Recommendations for an improved CDM SD tool are a relevant starting point to develop rules, modalities, and procedures for SD assessment in Article 6.4 as well as for other cooperative mitigation approaches.
Much mitigation-related governance activity is evident in a range of sectoral systems, and regarding particular governance functions. However, there is a tendency for this activity to relate to the easiest functions to address, such as "learning and knowledge building", or to take place in somewhat limited "niches". Across all sectoral systems examined, the gap between identified governance needs and what is currently supplied is most serious in terms of the critical function of setting rules to facilitate collective action. A lack of "guidance and signal" is also evident, particularly in the finance, extractive industries, energy-intensive industries, and buildings sectoral systems.
Of the sectoral systems examined, the power sector appears the most advanced in covering the main international governance functions required of it. Nevertheless, it still falls short in achieving critical governance functions necessary for sufficient decarbonisation. Significantly, while the signal is strong and clear for the phase-in of renewable energy, it is either vague or absent when it comes to the phase-out of fossil fuel-generated electricity. The same lack of signal that certain high-carbon activities need actively to be phased out is also evident in financial, fossil-fuel extractive industry and transport-related sectors.
More effective mitigation action will need greater co-ordination or orchestration effort, sometimes led by the UNFCCC, but also from the bodies such as the G20, as well as existing (or potentially new) sector-level institutions. The EU needs to re-consider what it means to provide climate leadership in an increasingly "polycentric" governance landscape.
The study analyses the country background, emissions trends, ongoing activities and barriers relating to the implementation of the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of Ethiopia under the UNFCCC. A special emphasis is laid on further mitigation potentials in the fields of agriculture, forestry and low-emission transport.
