Search Climate Insights Directory

The ADP 2-11 session in Bonn was characterized by a loss of consensus and a reversal of previous progress due to dissatisfaction with the Co-Chairs' proposed negotiating text. Instead of advancing toward a final agreement for COP 21, parties spent the session re-compiling a more comprehensive but fragmented text, reverting to positions held earlier in 2015. The meeting was further hampered by procedural disputes over the use of closed spin-off groups and a lack of progress on the accompanying decision text, leaving the Paris negotiations with a complex and unrefined basis for agreement.

The document evaluates the status of land-use and forestry commitments within the UNFCCC framework ahead of the December 2015 Paris Agreement. It finds that while the REDD+ methodological framework is largely complete, the final text of the Paris Agreement remained under intense negotiation. Analysis of 122 submitted INDCs reveals that most countries set economy-wide targets, with 40 including specific forest actions and 18 explicitly excluding the land-use sector.

The World Resources Institute states that while negotiators made significant strides in Bonn, a more vigorous pace is required to finalize a strong climate agreement in Paris. Progress was noted in mitigation, transparency, long-term goals, and the ratchet mechanism, though fundamental differences persist regarding adaptation and finance.

The We Mean Business Coalition argues that for a global climate deal to effectively incentivize private sector investment, it must include a quantifiable emissions target to keep warming below 2°C, a five-year cycle for increasing national commitments, and mechanisms—such as carbon pricing—to leverage trillions in private finance.

The briefing identifies critical areas for negotiation in Bonn ahead of COP21, including the five-year cycle for increasing mitigation ambition, the establishment of a long-term decarbonization goal, and the need for transparency and accountability in emissions reporting. It emphasizes that while 149 countries have submitted Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), these plans are insufficient to keep global temperature rise below 2 degrees C without a robust framework for continuous improvement. The document also highlights the necessity of balancing finance between adaptation and mitigation, prioritizing grant finance for vulnerable nations, and addressing 'loss and damage' for impacts that cannot be adapted to.

Track 0, led by Farhana Yamin, Erik Haites, and Niklas Höhne, has developed a draft Paris Agreement designed to reduce the 90 pages of the February 2015 Geneva Negotiating Text into a manageable, ambitious, and politically balanced document. This proposal was created in response to slow progress during the June negotiating session in Bonn and precedes an informal Ministerial Meeting hosted by the French Government on 20 and 21 July in Paris.

Carbon Market Watch argues that while carbon markets can be useful for high-cost emission reduction sectors, they must not substitute for domestic action or lead to the lock-in of high-carbon infrastructure. The organization emphasizes the necessity of an all-encompassing international accounting framework to prevent double counting and calls for the integration of social and environmental safeguards, including a grievance mechanism for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

The briefing identifies three critical action areas for negotiators in Bonn: establishing predictable 'cycles of action' for climate plans, defining long-term mitigation and adaptation goals, and planning for post-2020 climate finance. It argues that negotiators must now prioritize core issues and remove redundancies from the negotiating text to remain on track for an ambitious outcome at COP 21 in December.

The ACT 2015 consortium proposes five key ingredients for a successful 2015 global climate agreement: a clear long-term goal (including net zero by 2050), a commitment to non-regression of national targets, a five-year cycle for strengthening commitments, the integration of independent expert analysis, and a transparent progress assessment mechanism.

The March 2014 Bonn Climate Change Conference served as the first negotiating session of the year for UNFCCC Parties to identify elements for a new universal climate agreement and exchange views on intended nationally-determined contributions (INDCs).

The March 2014 Bonn Climate Change Conference served as a critical session for the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) to define the elements of a post-2020 universal climate agreement. A primary point of contention emerged regarding the scope of intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs), with developed nations viewing them as mitigation-only commitments while the G77/China sought to bundle them with adaptation and finance. The session also included technical workshops on renewable energy and energy efficiency to address the pre-2020 ambition gap and encourage subnational engagement.

The World Resources Institute outlines six key functions for the 2015 international climate agreement: providing a strong signal for decarbonization, connecting climate goals to national economic priorities, ensuring transparency and accountability, accelerating low-carbon investment, ensuring fairness through equity indicators, and supporting resilience and adaptation for vulnerable populations.

The SB 40 conference in Bonn saw limited progress on reforming Kyoto Protocol mechanisms and defining a framework for various mitigation approaches, though 60 nations agreed to phase out fossil fuels by mid-century. Negotiations on the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) were largely postponed to future sessions in Lima, while discussions continued on including land-use sectors in the CDM and the role of local stakeholder consultation.

The document examines the negotiations surrounding the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) ahead of COP-19, highlighting the tension between parties seeking minimal guidance and those calling for centralized oversight. It argues that for carbon markets to support a new climate deal, they must be predicated on ambitious mitigation targets, strict environmental integrity, and the prevention of double counting. The author specifically warns that a proposed FVA pilot phase, advocated by Poland, could set a dangerous precedent by allowing early action units to be recognized in a post-2020 regime before fundamental accounting rules are established.

The author contends that soil carbon markets are financially and technically unviable due to low carbon prices, measurement challenges, and the high cost of implementation. The text argues that pushing for emission reductions in agriculture burdens small farmers in India, Africa, and Latin America, potentially leading to the takeover of agricultural operations by non-farmers. It advocates for agro-ecological approaches and financial support for adaptation over market-based mitigation burdens.

The author argues that planning new market mechanisms like the NMM and FVA for COP-19 is 'careless' due to an 'astronomic over-supply' of existing offset credits from the CDM and JI. While regional compliance schemes are emerging in Japan, California, and China, there is a lack of common understanding regarding the scope and environmental integrity of the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) and the definition of non-market based approaches (NMBA).

The document discusses the ongoing negotiations in Bonn regarding the FVA and NMM, highlighting the need for standards that ensure real, permanent, and verified mitigation outcomes while avoiding double counting. Carbon Market Watch proposes specific governance and accounting measures to secure net atmospheric benefits and uphold human rights.

Carbon Market Watch argues that existing carbon markets have collapsed due to oversupply and poor quality, specifically citing the CDM and JI. The briefing recommends strengthening additionality criteria, shortening crediting periods, and establishing mandatory human rights and sustainability safeguards. For new mechanisms like the FVA and NMM, it advocates for a binding international governance structure and a common transaction tracking mechanism to prevent double counting of emission reductions.

This document is a Question and Answer (Q&A) briefing issued by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) to clarify the terms of an Invitation to Tender (ITT) for project AAGL-0030a. It provides detailed guidance for potential bidders regarding the role of the 'Global Learning Partner', budget allocations for local partners, expectations for conference participation at the Resilient Cities Congress, and the internal review process for publications.

The agreement defines the legal framework for the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) operations in Songdo, Republic of Korea. It grants the GCF juridical personality and legal capacity, ensures the inviolability of its premises and archives, and provides extensive diplomatic privileges and immunities for its staff and board members. The Republic of Korea commits to providing the headquarters free of charge, offering specific financial contributions for administrative expenses and equipment, and facilitating the movement and residency of GCF personnel.