By Navam Niles
The second day of the Bonn climate change negotiations outlined on pre-2020 ambition, Intended Nationally Determined Commitments and the 2015-agreement. Country statements from the first day can be found here.
Outline on Pre-2020 Ambition
The outline for the pre-2020 highlighted key areas that could be further examine in time.
Intended Nationally Determined Commitments
These should be communicated by the first quarter of 2015 at the earliest. Based on the inputs from Parties, efforts include a draft decision prepared at the starting point, reserved time for negotiations and an examination of the scope and process-related matters.
Other issues that deserve attention include the context and mandate of the decision, particular the legal nature of the INDC. Accordingly, it is important to communicate the INDC in an understandable manner and examine the best available method of making the information easily accessible.
There are still lingering questions concerning the INDC. Accordingly, some entity will need to grapple with the questions concerning the INDC and work to ensure further clarifications that are not offered in the decision draft.
More importantly, there is a genuine need for true negotiation modes instead of simple repetitions of earlier positions. To achieve such consensus, it is important to maximise external discussions.
Third Chunk – Work on 2015 Agreement
There is a great need to work on all the elements before coming towards a decision. Accordingly, it is important to unwrap and synthesise different elements to identify suitable options. Doing so, however, would require a broad focus and a determination to avoid shying away from hard issues.
In terms of mitigation, it is important to assess the status of current mitigation ambitions. Elements that require attention include commitments and contributions, differentiation, rules, and length of communication periods.
In terms of adaptation, it is important to review existing commitments and contributions and explore the space for deeper cooperation.
Finance remains a hard issue but also has proposals on general aspects and commitments. Specific issues include a plan to scale-up finance for low emissions and sustainable development paths. In addition, there is a need for more clarity on issues concerning adaptation demands, support, delivery and transparency.
Technology is a focal point and there is a need to enhance technological mechanisms. Moreover, this involves enhancing the synergy and enabling environment concerning Technology Needs Assessment (TNA). Importantly, it is necessary to examine the value added in the 2015 deal.
Capacity Building issues also received attention, especially efforts to enhance cooperation and coordination. Accordingly, this involved proposals for new institutional agreements and efforts to improve transparency of action and support with a special focus on differentiation and flexibility.
The overall process should be one that is measurable, reportable, and verifiable (MRV). Accordingly, there are proposals helping to identify how this could be done. The chairs have also made a diagram that involves communicating INDC. There is also a need to adjust elements such as adequacy, equity and fairness in terms of INDCs.
To bring about a full circle, it is important to review and feed additional contributions through an ex-post review process.
Finally, there is a need to organise the timing of this process. Questions arose as to whether this should be prepared before Paris 2015 or afterwards, in 2016. Moreover, the review dates are yet to be finalised, with current proposals, ranging from 2020 to 2025. This will also depend on whether parties would like to continue with the current structure. The last element in terms of timing is compliance, with most pointing towards 2030 as a suitable date.
[Photo credits: IISD]
Navam Niles works as a Research Associate at SLYCAN, focusing on energy security and the politics concerning global environmental problems. His core research interests also include Public International Law, International Development, Foreign Policy Analysis, and International Security. In addition, he is a lecturer at the Royal Institute of Colombo, teaching subjects pertaining to Politics, International Relations and Development Studies.
