Search Climate Insights Directory

The study investigates how internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) could increase global GHG emissions if countries with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) less stringent than business-as-usual (BAU) projections transfer 'hot air'. Through road-testing 17 countries, the authors evaluate relative and absolute limits on transfers, concluding that while absolute limits are simple, relative limits based on historical emissions (as proposed by Brazil) could more effectively prevent hot air transfers, though they may restrict developing countries with increasing emissions trends.

Carbon Market Watch advocates for an orderly phase-out of the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and suggests using a placeholder for market provisions in the Paris Agreement rulebook until robust rules are established to ensure emissions reductions are additional and do not undermine climate ambition.

India has transitioned from a 'custodian' role for the global South, strictly adhering to the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), toward a more proactive and pragmatic leadership style. While professional negotiators have historically maintained rigid positions based on equity and historical emissions, political leadership—notably during the Copenhagen, Cancun, and Durban COPs—has shown a greater willingness to shift toward binding commitments and transparency. India now emphasizes solar power collaboration and the implementation of the Paris Agreement while continuing to demand green technology transfer from developed nations.

The policy brief examines the transition from the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to the Paris Agreement's Sustainable Development Mechanism (SDM). It argues that the CDM's offsetting model is obsolete in a world where all countries have climate commitments and recommends abolishing carbon offsetting in favor of results-based climate finance. The author highlights significant failures of the CDM, including the fact that approximately 73% of potential credits between 2013 and 2020 likely did not represent real emission reductions. Key recommendations include stopping CDM project registration by COP 24 in 2018 and ending the use of CDM credits by 2023.

COP23 was intended as a technical summit to establish the Paris Agreement Rulebook, but achieved only modest progress on these rules. Key breakthroughs included a first-time agreement to address climate challenges in agriculture and the establishment of a Gender Action Plan and a Local Communities and Indigenous People’s Platform. The conference launched the Talanoa dialogue to accelerate action and increase ambition. While official negotiations were slow, strong political support was demonstrated by non-state actors and an alternative US delegation. Additionally, the 'Powering Past Coal' alliance was endorsed by 28 countries and regional actors, though Germany was notably absent from the pledge.

Carbon Market Watch argues for the phase-out of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) by the end of the second Kyoto commitment period, recommending that project registration cease as of COP 24 in 2018. The organization advocates for the establishment of a CDM grievance and safeguard mechanism to protect human rights and the environment, alongside strengthened civil society participation in stakeholder consultations. It further calls for a CMP/CMA process to guide the transition to the Paris Agreement's Sustainable Development Mechanism (SDM) and the implementation of measures to prevent double counting of credits used in ICAO's CORSIA scheme.

Carbon Market Watch argues for the phase-out of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) by the end of the second Kyoto commitment period, recommending that project registration cease by COP24 in 2018. The organization advocates for the establishment of a CDM grievance mechanism and institutional safeguards to protect human rights and the environment, noting that the CDM currently lacks the accountability mechanisms found in other international financial institutions. Additionally, it calls for strengthened civil society participation in stakeholder consultations and the implementation of measures to prevent double counting of credits used under ICAO's CORSIA scheme and nationally determined contributions.

The author asserts that the Paris Agreement's fast ratification demonstrates increasing political will to address climate change. The text highlights the role of business initiatives, such as the Low Carbon Technology Partnerships Initiative (LCTPi), in proving the feasibility of emissions reductions. It concludes that current Nationally Determined Contributions are insufficient to limit warming to 2°C or 1.5°C, necessitating further business-led efforts to provide policymakers with the confidence to increase their targets, specifically through the Low Emissions Solutions Conference at COP22.

The document outlines the requirements for the new carbon market mechanism established by Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. It emphasizes that these markets must drive actual emission reductions beyond domestic action, avoid double-counting through robust accounting, and exclude fossil fuel investments. Furthermore, it calls for strong human rights safeguards and alignment with the UN's Sustainable Development Goals to avoid the failures associated with the Kyoto Protocol's flexible mechanisms.

The briefing outlines five key priorities for climate finance at COP22: the roadmap to mobilize $100 billion for developing countries by 2020, the establishment of accounting modalities to define what constitutes climate finance, the development of systematic reporting formats for finance provided and received, the need to scale up and balance adaptation finance relative to mitigation, and the potential renewal of the Adaptation Fund's mandate to serve the Paris Agreement.

The document discusses the transition from Kyoto Protocol carbon markets to the Paris Agreement's cooperative approaches, specifically the use of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs). It warns that without robust accounting and oversight, these transfers risk introducing 'hot air' carbon units into ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which could jeopardize the goals of limiting global temperature increase to 1.5C or well below 2C.

The document provides a detailed comparative analysis between the Kyoto Protocol's flexibility mechanisms (CDM, JI, and IET) and the emerging frameworks under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement (specifically Articles 6.2 and 6.4). It examines differences in purpose, governance, and accounting, highlighting the shift from a bifurcated system of Annex I and non-Annex I countries to a universal application for all Parties. The paper emphasizes the need for 'robust accounting' and 'environmental integrity' to avoid double counting and the transfer of 'hot air', while outlining critical unresolved questions for UNFCCC negotiations regarding the nature of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) and the scope of eligible activities.

The report examines the shift in global climate governance from the top-down targets of the Kyoto Protocol to the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) of the Paris Agreement. It highlights the 'ambition gap' in current pledges and argues that the success of the agreement depends on integrating the actions of non-state actors—such as cities, regions, and businesses—into national frameworks. The document details specific subnational initiatives like the C40 network and Brazil's CB27, while providing a case study of Singapore's role in the negotiations.

The Paris Agreement establishes a coordinated global framework covering 98% of emissions, replacing the Kyoto Protocol's 14% coverage. It implements a five-year cycle for increasing national ambition to close a 15 gigatonne emissions gap and includes a commitment to review the 100 billion dollar annual climate aid target upward starting in 2025.

The document highlights the Paris Agreement as a foundation for coordinated global action, noting that it covers 98% of emissions compared to the 14% covered by the Kyoto Protocol. It specifies that national ambitions will increase every five years to close a 15-gigaton gap and mentions the goal of mobilizing 100 billion dollars annually for climate support, with a review scheduled from 2025 onwards.

The COP22 conference in Marrakech focused on establishing the 'rulebook' for the Paris Agreement, with parties agreeing to a 2018 deadline for its operationalization. Key outcomes included the approval of a work programme for transparency and adaptation, the announcement of US$81 million for the Adaptation Fund, and the launch of the Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action to catalyze pre-2020 efforts. Despite political uncertainty regarding the United States, the document notes a strong commitment from emerging economies and the private sector to pursue a low-carbon transition.

The author evaluates the Paris Climate Agreement as a success, highlighting its binding nature for nearly all countries, the establishment of a transparent five-year review system for INDCs, and the goal to limit global temperature rise to 2°C. While noting the mobilization of 100 billion dollars annually from 2020 for developing nations, the author criticizes the omission of specific terms like 'decarbonization' or 'emissions neutrality'.

The author contends that international aviation and shipping, which together account for approximately 5% of global CO2 emissions, are being overlooked in Paris negotiations despite projected emission growth of up to 270% by 2050. The text criticizes the removal of references to the '2C objective' and levy schemes for the Adaptation Fund from draft texts and calls for the ICAO and IMO to provide transparent annual emissions data.

The document warns that the Paris climate treaty risks failure if it allows 'hot air' (non-real emission reductions) to be used for compliance. Drawing on failures of the Kyoto Protocol's CDM and JI mechanisms, and the oversupply of permits in the EU ETS, the author advocates for the cancellation of surplus permits, the creation of a robust international accounting system to prevent double counting, the end of carbon offsetting in favor of direct finance for developing countries, and the exclusion of non-permanent land use offsets from carbon markets.

The briefing argues that carbon markets have historically failed to increase climate commitments and have often undermined emissions reductions through 'hot air' loopholes. It recommends that the Paris agreement prevent double counting, ensure that international trading is supplementary to ambitious domestic action, and restrict market mechanisms to countries with adequate carbon budgets. The text notes a shift from a single global UN-led market toward a fragmented landscape of national and regional initiatives, while advocating for a transition from carbon offsets toward direct financial support for climate actions in developing countries.