Status of the UNFCCC Negotiations

This report by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) provides an overview of the status of international climate change negotiations as of September 2009, focusing on the outcomes of the Bonn II and Bonn III talks. It details the progress and divergences across the four pillars of the Bali Action Plan—mitigation, adaptation, technology, and financing—as member countries of the UNFCCC worked toward a post-2012 emission reduction regime to be adopted at COP 15 in Copenhagen.

• Negotiations in Bonn during June and August 2009 resulted in a 200-page revised negotiating text, but progress was hindered by a divide between developed and developing countries. While developed countries pushed to streamline the text for line-by-line negotiations, developing countries preferred general discussions, leading the UNFCCC executive secretary to warn that the pace would need to increase to achieve a successful result in Copenhagen.
• Regarding mitigation, the AWG-LCA and AWG-KP are negotiating different aspects of emission reductions. Developed countries are discussing the nature of their commitments and comparability of effort, while talks for developing countries center on nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs). A point of contention is whether major developing emitters, such as China and South Korea, should be categorized differently to take more stringent actions, a proposal rejected by developing countries.
• Under the AWG-KP, parties failed to agree on the scale of emission reductions for Annex I Parties. Most developing countries advocate for reductions of 25% to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. Canada presented a national target to reduce emissions by 20% from 2006 levels by 2020, leading to a 60% to 70% reduction by 2050, noting that the 2020 target would be met through domestic actions without using LULUCF in calculations.
• Adaptation is viewed as an area where progress exceeded expectations, with general agreement that an overarching framework is essential. However, funding remains a point of divergence: developing countries seek public grant funding additional to official development aid under COP authority, while developed countries emphasize the role of private funds, carbon markets, and country-driven priorities for the most vulnerable.
• Parties remain far from consensus on technology transfer and capacity-building. Developed countries advocate for catalyzing private sector investment and maintaining the current intellectual property rights regime. Conversely, developing countries argue that the intellectual property rights regime is a barrier to transfer and insist that funding must come from a UNFCCC financial mechanism rather than voluntary arrangements.
• Financing discussions are split between the need for new, predictable public resources and the use of existing institutions. The African Group stated it would not accept an agreement without a financial commitment of 1% of GDP from developed nations. Developed countries, including Canada and the United States, emphasize maximizing the effectiveness of existing institutions like the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility and catalyzing private financial flows.
• The United States' position is a critical factor for the Copenhagen outcome. The U.S. seeks an agreement with mitigation targets for industrialized countries and binding commitments for major developing economies, but it does not support internationally binding agreements with punitive consequences for non-compliance. There is uncertainty regarding whether the U.S. Congress will pass the domestic legislation the U.S. intends to use as the basis for its commitments.

APA

Murphy, D., Drexhage, J., & Gass, P. (2009). Status of the UNFCCC Negotiations. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/status_unfccc_negotiations_bonn.pdf

Chicago

Murphy, Deborah, John Drexhage, and Philip Gass. Status of the UNFCCC Negotiations. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2009. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/status_unfccc_negotiations_bonn.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Murphy |first1=Deborah |last2=Drexhage |first2=John |last3=Gass |first3=Philip |title=Status of the UNFCCC Negotiations |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=September 2009 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/status_unfccc_negotiations_bonn.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{murphy2009status, author = {Murphy, Deborah and Drexhage, John and Gass, Philip}, title = {{Status of the UNFCCC Negotiations}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2009}, month = sep, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/status_unfccc_negotiations_bonn.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }