Assessing the Outcomes of COP 17

The report analyzes the results of COP 17, highlighting a trade-off between inclusivity and ambition. Key outcomes include the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, the agreement on a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol, and the creation of the Durban Platform for Cooperative Action to establish a global mitigation regime by 2020. While it marks a turning point by including major emitters like the US, China, and India in future legal obligations, the report notes significant gaps in funding clarity and short-term mitigation ambition.

• COP 17 established the Durban Platform for Cooperative Action, which commits all parties to a negotiating track aimed at creating a global mitigation regime by 2020 that covers all major emitters for the first time.
• Parties agreed to a second commitment period (CP2) for the Kyoto Protocol running from 2013 to either 2017 or 2020, though it is characterized as weaker than the first period because it relies on a voluntary "pledge and translate" exercise without an aggregate global mitigation target.
• The Green Climate Fund (GCF) was operationalized to serve as the central long-term financing body for developing countries, but it lacks capitalized funding and clarity on long-term donor commitments beyond fast-start financing.
• Progress was made on adaptation through the operationalization of the Adaptation Committee, which will have 16 members with disproportionate representation for developing and least developed countries.
• The report identifies a significant "ambition gap," noting that current mitigation commitments are insufficient to keep warming below 2 degrees Celsius, with a consensus that temperatures are more likely to rise between 2.5 and 4 degrees Celsius over the next century.
• Regarding REDD+, the conference achieved progress on technical issues and financing, specifically creating space for "results-based REDD+" (Phase 3) to allow these activities to eventually enter a larger carbon market.
• Negotiations on agriculture were difficult and linked to sectoral approaches; while all countries acknowledge its importance, there are concerns regarding trade implications and whether the focus should be on mitigation or adaptation.

APA

Boyle, J. (2011). Assessing the Outcomes of COP 17. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/assessing_the_outcomes_cop17.pdf

Chicago

Boyle, Jessica. Assessing the Outcomes of COP 17. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2011. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/assessing_the_outcomes_cop17.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Boyle |first1=Jessica |title=Assessing the Outcomes of COP 17 |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=December 2011 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/assessing_the_outcomes_cop17.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{boyle2011assessing, author = {Boyle, Jessica}, title = {{Assessing the Outcomes of COP 17}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2011}, month = dec, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/assessing_the_outcomes_cop17.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }