kato (oecd) durable2015 ccxg gf march2014
TRANSCRIPT
Climate Change Expert Group www.oecd.org/env/cc/ccxg.htm
Takayoshi Kato, [email protected]
Based on the discussion paper “Built to Last: Designing a Flexible and Durable 2015 Climate Change Agreement” by Gregory Briner, Takayoshi Kato and Takashi Hattori
Revisiting and adjustment processes
for the 2015 agreement
CCXG Global Forum
18 March 2014
2 Climate Change Expert Group
Presentation Outline
Outline of different options for flexibility before and after 2015
Processes before COP21
Processes after COP21
Discussion questions
3 Climate Change Expert Group
Before and after the 2015 agreement
There could be different ways of including flexibility in the 2015 agreement before and after COP21;
Providing enough flexibility;
Encouraging broader participation
Keeping the below 2°C goal within reach;
Enhancing predictability for investors
Balance needed between…Consultation
processes
Revisiting & Adjustment
Adoption of the 2015 agreement
Before
After
Consultation processes- Before 2015 agreement
5 Climate Change Expert Group
Possible consultations on intended contributions before COP 21 in 2015
Enhance understanding of intended mitigation contributions
Raise ambition by identifying opportunities for enhanced co-operation and co-ordination
Potential aims of the consultations:
Which Parties? Timeline? Who would be involved? Forms of outputs? Guidance? (if any)
Open questions to clarify:
Revisiting and adjustment processes
- After 2015 agreement
7 Climate Change Expert Group
Process for revisiting and adjustment
Possible approach to establishing revisiting and adjustment processes for mitigation contributions
It could be applied to other aspects of the agreement. (e.g. adaptation, finance, etc.)
Adoption of the 2015 agreement
RevisitinRevisitingg
AdjustmAdjustmentent
8 Climate Change Expert Group
Revisiting the contributions
i) Periodic ii) Triggered
iii) Ad hoc
The 2015 agreement
Adjustment
•Higher predictability of timetable
•More efficient by revisiting only when needed
•Higher flexibility for parties
Pro
Con
•Increasing uncertainty and transaction cost if too frequent
•Politically difficult to agree the nature of triggers
•Might be revisited too often, or not at all
9 Climate Change Expert Group
Options for the triggers
a) Quantitative
b) Qualitative
c) Call by others
ii) Triggered
The 2015 agreement
Adjustment
• Annual GHG emissions• Atmospheric
GHG concentration etc.
• Natural disasters• New scientific
findings
etc.
• Call for contributions of another Party revisited
The POPs ProtocolFTA (Australia, NZ, ASEAN)
WTO (Dispute Settlement System)
10 Climate Change Expert Group
Adjusting the contributions
3 options for adjustment of mitigation contributions.
Yet, the focus would be on upward (strengthening) adjustment in light of the goal of the Convention.
Strengthening
Weakening
Upward
No adj.
• Encourage ambitious initial offer• Facilitate broader participation•Discourage pulling out later
•May result in insufficient near-term collective ambition
Downward
Advantage
DisadvantageNo adj.
Upward
11 Climate Change Expert Group
Discussion questions
1. How to strike the right balance between including flexibility in the agreement, providing predictability for investors and ensuring environmental ambition?
2. What type of process is most likely to result in mitigation contributions that are collectively ambitious enough to keep the below 2-degree goal within reach?
3. Under what conditions, if any, could downward adjustments (i.e. weakening) of mitigation contributions take place?