published by IISD, the International Institute for Sustainable Development
in cooperation with the Climate Change Secretariat.
Special Report on Selected Side Events at SB 22
19-27 May 2005 | Bonn, Germany
UNFCCC
IISD
Daily Web Coverage & Daily Reports:
Thursday 19
Friday 20
Saturday 21
Monday 23
Tuesday 24
Wednesday 25
Thursday 26
Brief Analysis

Events convened on Monday, 23 May 2005

European Capacity Building Initiative launch

Presented by the International Institute for Environment and Development

Benito Müller, Oxford Climate Policy, presented on the European Capacity Building Initiative (ECBI), which aims at supporting delegates and other stakeholders from targeted developing countries to enhance their capacity to participate effectively in climate change negotiations and to generate trust by bringing together developing country stakeholders and their European counterparts. He explained that the ECBI comprises a fellowship, a workshop, and a policy analysis programme. He said the goal of the fellowship programme is to build south-south and north-south trust and facilitate institutional and procedural knowledge exchange. He explained that the workshop programme’s objective is to enhance the negotiating skills of individuals and groups of delegates and that the policy analysis programme aims at building analytic capacity. He described the management structure of the ECBI, and indicated that its pilot phase started in April 2005 and will be followed by a 2006-2007 phase to prove the validity of the ECBI concept.

Saleemul Huq, International Institute for Environment and Development, expanded on the workshop programme of the ECBI, which consists of negotiation workshops at the COPs as well as intersessional workshops for the South-Asian and Sub-Saharan regions. He stated that the workshops aim at enhancing the negotiating capacity of delegates from Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and helping LDCs to function as an effective negotiating group. He reported on the first two workshops held at COP 9 and COP 10 and detailed intended follow-up activities, including: mentoring for junior LDC negotiators; keeping a roster of LDC delegates; and enhancing information exchange through the ECBI website.

Christoph Böhringer, Centre for European Economic Research, said the goal of the core policy analysis programme is to enhance negotiators’ understanding of modeling issues. He explained that the project will comprise a core seminar with modeling experts to present on the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches, and the development of a model inventory and database. He added that the full policy analysis programme will include a capacity building project on technical modeling through in-depth training and workshops in selected fields.

Discussion: Participants underscored the need to build the capacity of LDCs to identify where their interests lie and how to negotiate as a group. Müller stressed that the ECBI is demand-driven and intends to raise the awareness of delegates from developing countries on the availability of alternative approaches. Other issues discussed included the role of models in the post-Kyoto regime, the ECBI budget, and the allocation within its three programmes.

Benito Müller, Oxford Climate Policy, explained that the fellowship programme of the ECBI aims to build trust, and exchange procedural and institutional knowledge
Contact:
Benito Müller <benito.mueller@philosophy.ox.ac.uk>
Saleemul Huq <saleemul.huq@iied.org>
Christoph Böhringer <boehringer@zew.de>
Bo Kjellén <bo.kjellen@sei.se>

Making the UNFCCC climate neutral

Presented by the UNFCCC

John Henssen, UNFCCC, specified that the aim of the “climate neutral initiative” is to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions associated with conducting COP and SB meetings through climate change mitigation measures elsewhere. He stated that in order to further this initiative, the Secretariat has published a document (FCCC/SBI/2005/9) to seek parties’ views and guidance. He specified that the initiative’s guiding principle is simplicity.He indicated that it is necessary to ascertain how much carbon dioxide is associated with meetings, offset these, and communicate the results. He highlighted that as the estimation tool has been developed minimal resources are now needed.

Florin Vladu, UNFCCC, indicated that potential options for offsetting emissions could be: purchasing emissions credits from climate projects, a carbon fund or an emission trading scheme; or creating stand-alone CDM or other projects. He indicated that the preference seems to be for projects in developing countries.

Bill Sneyd, Future Forests, outlined the work of his organization for WSSD and COP 9 and said the critical issue is the programme design of the “climate neutral initiative”. He highlighted the importance of establishing emissions assessments, selecting offset projects, and communicating with participants. He emphasized the need for a single coordinating entity to simplify decision-making. He suggested that the Secretariat outsource the initiative and involve parties, observers, and other stakeholders.

John Henssen, UNFCCC, said the guiding principle of the “climate neutral initiative” is simplicity
Discussion: Participants questioned the double counting of credits from CDM projects under the initiative and the use of the CDM Gold Standard, and said projects should be instituted in developing countries. Several participants underscored that the scheme must be voluntary, rather than imposed by the Secretariat.
Contact:
John Henssen <jhenssen@unfccc.int>
Florin Vladu <fvladu@unfccc.int>
Bill Sneyd <bill.sneyd@futureforests.com>

A global climate community: Heads in the sand or willing to lead?

Presented by Action for a Global Climate Community

Peter Luff, Action for a Global Climate Community (AGCC), and David Grace, AGCC, chaired a roundtable discussion on AGCC’s campaign for a new initiative to unite developed and developing countries in reducing carbon emissions “farther and faster” than existing Kyoto obligations. Luff said the AGCC proposes this commitment be based on the principle of “contraction and convergence” – the contraction of greenhouse gas emissions to a safe internationally agreed scientific level and convergence to equal emission rights for all.

Discussion: Participants considered the meaning of equity, and “contraction and convergence.” They discussed ways to harness momentum for future action on climate change, including through education and civil society support. Several participants noted that government action will be fostered if governments understand that failure to take action will cost more than mitigating climate change.

On providing incentives for industry, one participant noted that incentives are not only financial but that rule-based certainty may also act as an incentive. Another participant emphasized the potential for Africa to utilize hydrogen and solar energy, while others outlined current barriers to the use of such resources in Africa.

Most participants considered an institutional framework to be key to any future commitment on climate change. Luff and Grace raised the idea of a “bubble” of willing countries negotiating inside the existing UNFCCC. One participant suggested the AGCC should: invite discussion on the requirements of equity and “contraction and convergence”; encourage civil society to view climate change as an equity issue; and invite critique of post-Kyoto proposals that are not based on equity principles.

Peter Luff, AGCC, explained that we cannot wait for all of the big emitters to come on board before making future commitments to address climate change

Recent analysis from the Annex I expert group

Presented by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

Jane Ellis, OECD, outlined: institutional developments; proposed CDM projects and their status; and funding for CDM/JI. She indicated the wide but uneven geographical spread of projects and stated that funding availability has improved significantly.

Martina Bosi, International Energy Agency (IEA), explained that the study “Exploring Options for Sectoral Crediting Mechanisms” (SCMs) focuses on three options: sectoral policies; rate-based sectoral baselines; and fixed sectoral limits. She said all SCMs need baselines and reliable data. She stated that the extent of environmental benefits will depend on the design of the mechanism.

Cédric Philibert, IEA, outlined future international cooperation on emissions reductions including quantitative and non-quantitative approaches, indicating that they could involve: fixed binding targets; dynamic binding targets with price caps; technology agreements; and carbon taxes. In considering international energy technology collaboration, he highlighted clean coal technologies in China where technology transfer has occurred through, inter alia, patent acquisitions and the involvement of development banks.

Debra Justus, OECD, in outlining the integration of wind power into electricity systems, discussed no-cost supply uncertainties and quick set-up. She said wind electricity generation has grown where research and development have been coupled with supporting policies, and where “push and pull” technologies have been employed for supply and manufacturing. She highlighted lessons learned, including that market-changing policies must engage stakeholders throughout the commercialization chain, and that technology development forms a continuum from research to development.

Discussion: Participants asked questions related to the difficulty of taking a sectoral approach to emissions reductions, the political feasibility of SCMs, broadening the scope of the CDM, and the need to provide challenges and incentives for the industry to reduce emissions.

Noting that SCMs constitute a potential approach to emissions reductions, Martina Bosi, OECD, called for further work on this issue
Contact:
Jane Ellis <jane.ellis@oecd.org>
Martina Bosi <martina.bosi@iea.org>
Cédric Philibert <cedric.philibert@iea.org>
Debra Justus <debra.justus@oecd.org>

Beyond Kyoto 2012: A structural evolution of the Kyoto Protocol by a global emission trading scheme

Presented by Germany

Highlighting the need to think beyond Kyoto, Gerhard Spilok, Ministry for the Environment of the State of Baaden-Württemberg, Germany, noted the Global Climate Certificate System (GCCS) as a possible alternative.

Hans-Jochen Luhmann, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, underscored the urgent challenge of cutting emissions by 2050 and indicated that global emissions are estimated to increase by 50% by the end of the Kyoto period due to emissions from developing countries and the US.

Jörg Dürr-Pucher, German Environmental Aid, said the Kyoto Protocol’s merits include incentives to save energy and develop cleaner technologies. He identified the need for: a global quantified climate sustainability target; the integration of developing countries and the US; and a globally effective economic incentive for companies and governments to reduce emissions.

Lutz Wicke, European School of Management, stated that the 550 ppm concentration level requires the GCCS to cap global annual emissions to 30 billion tons from 2013 onwards. He said the GCCS is based on immediate equal per capita distribution allocated to national governments under strict rules. He said the allocation corresponds to the estimated emissions in 2015 but that it necessitates corrections to avoid destroying industrialized countries’ economies.

Christoph Böhringer, Centre for European Economic Research, noted that an integrated assessment of long-term emissions abatement strategies shows that the GCCS is economically efficient, and leads to lower carbon concentrations than other scenarios and to an approximate temperature rise of 2.6C.

Discussion: Participants discussed adaptation needs and the distribution of benefits from the GCCS among developing countries. They noted that the EU’s 2C target would require a lower cap than the current GCCS proposal.

Lutz Wicke, European School of Management, highlighted that the 550 ppm level is the most optimistic goal still achievable and that the global cap and trade system is the only way to accomplish it
Contact:
Gerhard Spilok <gerhard.spilok@uvm.bel.de>
Hans-Jochen Luhmann <j.luhmann@wupperinst.org>
Jörg Dürr-Pucher <duerr-pucher@duh.de>
Lutz Wicke <prof.wicke@gmx.de>
Christoph Böhringer <boehringer@zew.de>

CC: Forum

Presented by the UNFCCC

June Budhooram, UNFCCC, said the Consultative Group of Experts on National Communications from non-Annex I parties (CGE) is essential for supporting these parties in preparing their national communications. Emily Ojoo-Massawa, CGE, explained that the CGE aims to identify technical problems and assist non-Annex I parties in preparing national communications.

Summarizing the work of the CGE’s thematic group on vulnerability and adaptation, Arthur Rolle, CGE, suggested that based on the success of an April 2005 workshop in Mozambique, more training workshops should be held. On the provisional findings of the thematic group on greenhouse gas inventories, Taka Hiraishi, CGE, said all non-Annex I parties used the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines in their first national communications, and many covered a wide range of gases but reported difficulties in obtaining national activity data.

Presenting on behalf of the mitigation group of the CGE and Jaekyu Lim, CGE, Festus Luboyera, UNFCCC, noted that: the scope of mitigation reports in national communications varies; technical support and adequate data are essential for mitigation analysis; and the “time horizon” for mitigation assessments should be standardized. Luis Paz Castro, CGE, said the cross-cutting issues thematic group of the CGE plans to prepare a template to assist countries in reporting on such issues, and that many parties consider Article 6 activities on education and training to be important.

Martha Perdomo, UNDP/UNEP National Communications Support Programme (NCSP), said the NCSP would: promote feedback with regional partners; identify needs through monitoring and direct feedback; and work with the CGE on technical assistance activities.

Discussion: Participants asked questions on: widening the scope of training workshops; choosing a baseline year for non-Annex I national communications; using the IPCC inventories software; and standardizing “time horizons.” One participant suggested the NCSP should work with regional centers to provide technical assistance.

Emily Ojoo-Massawa, CGE, outlined the aims of the CGE and its future workplan
Contact:
June Budhooram <jbudhooram@unfccc.int>
Emily Ojoo-Massawa <climate@ubnet.co.ke>
Arthur Rolle <awr.met@batelnet.bs>
Taka Hiraishi <hiraishi@iges.org.jp>
Luis Paz Castro <epaz@met.inf.cu>
Jaekyu Lim <jklim@keei.re.kr>
Martha Perdomo <martha.perdomo@undp.org>
The Earth Negotiations Bulletin on the side (ENBOTS) © <enb@iisd.org> is a special publication of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in cooperation with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Secretariat. This issue has been written by Ingrid Barnsley, Alice Bisiaux, Maria Larsson Ortino, and Kati Kulovesi. The photographer is Leila Mead. The Digital Editor is Diego Noguera. The Editor is Lisa Schipper, Ph.D. <lisa@iisd.org>. The Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI <kimo@iisd.org>. Funding for the publication of ENBOTS at UNFCCC SB 22 is provided by the UNFCCC Secretariat. The opinions expressed in ENBOTS are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and funders. Excerpts from ENBOTS may be used in non-commercial publications only with appropriate academic citation. For permission to use this material in commercial publications, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at <kimo@iisd.org>. Electronic versions of issues of ENBOTS from SB 22 can be found on the Linkages website at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb22/. The ENBOTS Team at SB 22 can be contacted by e-mail at <alice@iisd.org>.

Back to daily coverage
Click the above button to go back to our ENB main coverage


Digimarc and the Digimarc logo are registered trademarks of Digimarc Corporation.  The "Digimarc Digital Watermarking" Web Button is a trademark of Digimarc Corporation, used with permission.


! Please e-mail the Digital editor should you have any questions regarding the content of this page.

| Back to Linkages home | Visit IISDnet | Send e-mail to ENB |
© 2005,  IISD. All rights reserved.