Pit stop Poznan : an analysis of negotiations on the Bali action plan at the stopover to Copenhagen
(2009)
This paper analyzes the international climate negotiations that took place at the 14th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP) and the 4th Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) held in Poznan, December 1–12, 2008. It works out the main issues at stake in the negotiations, contrasts divergences in interests amongst negotiating Parties, and summarizes the main results achieved in Poznan. Furthermore, it contextualizes the Poznan negotiations within the broader political and economic context, which has shaped climate policy making throughout 2008. The paper ends with an outlook on the tasks ahead in 2009, until the next COP/CMP in December 2009 in Copenhagen.
This article analyses the negotiations on the future of the international climate regime at the United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen. It also discusses key issues in the ongoing business of implementing the Climate Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. The article lays out the main issues at stake in the negotiations, contrasts divergences in interests amongst negotiating parties, and summarises the results achieved in Copenhagen. The report discusses these results in detail and concludes with an outlook on how the challenges ahead could be overcome.
This report analyses the international climate negotiations that took place at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC held in Copenhagen in December 2009. It lays out the main issues at stake in the negotiations, contrasts divergences in interests amongst negotiating parties, and summarises the results achieved in Copenhagen. The report discusses these results in detail and concludes with an outlook on how the challenges ahead could be overcome.
The research project seeks to identify the CDM SD tool's possible shortcomings, and to make structured recommendations on how to improve the EB's SD tool. Findings from this project are meant to have a lighthouse effect on the development of provisions on Sustainable Development within other carbon mechanisms of the UNFCCC and beyond. This report represents the consolidated findings of three work packages within this research project. The first chapter provides some background on the subject at hand, and leads into the report. The following chapter covers the assessment and comparison of the SD provisions of selected flexible mechanisms and multilateral standards.
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.