Differentiated mitigation commitments in a new climate agreement

The document examines the types of mitigation commitments, equity principles, and procedural pathways for a new climate agreement, specifically focusing on how the LDC Group can influence negotiations to ensure a warming limit of 1.5°C.

• The LDC Group seeks a global emission pathway that limits warming to below 1.5°C and closes the emissions gap by 2020, as current pledges under the Copenhagen Accord are insufficient to meet the 2°C or 1.5°C limits.
• Mitigation commitments can be result-based (outcome-focused) or activity-based (behaviour-focused), and may be 'conditional' based on international support or the actions of other parties, which helps developing countries manage risks but may limit overall ambition.
• There is significant disagreement among parties regarding the nature of commitments: the EU advocates for legally binding commitments with ex ante quantification, the US proposes a flexible approach based on national circumstances, and some parties suggest a mix of absolute targets and flexible commitments based on development levels.
• Equity in mitigation effort sharing is based on the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities" (CBDR/RC), with four primary dimensions of discussion: responsibility (historical emissions), capability (ability to pay), equality (per person allowances), and cost effectiveness.
• An Equity Reference Framework (ERF) is proposed as a tool to quantify CBDR/RC principles and guide emission reduction ranges, though it is noted as highly political and difficult to negotiate.
• Different countries propose different criteria for differentiation: Brazil suggests using historical responsibility starting from 1850, Ethiopia proposes basing Annex I status on cumulative per capita emissions, and the LDC Group supports differentiation based on agreed criteria for developed, emerging, middle-income, and most vulnerable countries.
• The current process for 'intended nationally determined contributions' lacks an official review mechanism for stringency or type, creating a risk that the 2015 agreement will have insufficient ambition, necessitating a future mechanism to increase ambition.

APA

Höhne, N., Fekete, H., Ellermann, C., & Freitas, S. (2014). Differentiated mitigation commitments in a new climate agreement. Climate and Development Knowledge Network. https://cdkn.org/sites/default/files/files/LDC-Briefing_differentiated-mitigation-resp.pdf

Chicago

Höhne, Niklas, Hanna Fekete, Christian Ellermann, and Sandra Freitas. Differentiated mitigation commitments in a new climate agreement. Climate and Development Knowledge Network, 2014. https://cdkn.org/sites/default/files/files/LDC-Briefing_differentiated-mitigation-resp.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Höhne |first1=Niklas |last2=Fekete |first2=Hanna |last3=Ellermann |first3=Christian |last4=Freitas |first4=Sandra |title=Differentiated mitigation commitments in a new climate agreement |publisher=Climate and Development Knowledge Network |date=2014 |url=https://cdkn.org/sites/default/files/files/LDC-Briefing_differentiated-mitigation-resp.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{hhne2014differentiated, author = {Höhne, Niklas and Fekete, Hanna and Ellermann, Christian and Freitas, Sandra}, title = {{Differentiated mitigation commitments in a new climate agreement}}, institution = {Climate and Development Knowledge Network}, year = {2014}, url = {https://cdkn.org/sites/default/files/files/LDC-Briefing_differentiated-mitigation-resp.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }