Daily report for 10 June 2013

Bonn Climate Change Conference - June 2013

In the morning, an ADP workshop on a practical approach to increasing pre-2020 ambition took place. In the afternoon, an ADP workshop on linkages was held, together with a workshop on results-based finance for the full implementation of activities referred to in Decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 70 (REDD+) and the first SBI in-session dialogue to advance implementation of the Doha work programme on Convention Article 6 (education, training and public awareness). During the day, informal consultations took place under the SBSTA and ADP, and on the SBI agenda.


PRACTICAL APPROACH TO INCREASING PRE-2020 AMBITION AND THE WAY FORWARD (ADP  Workstream 2): During the morning ADP workshop, parties continued discussions on enhancing finance, technology and capacity building, and then addressed the way forward to COP 19.

SOUTH AFRICA cautioned against using global economic instability as an excuse for delaying the delivery of means of implementation, and stressed the need to focus on capitalizing the GCF.

VENEZUELA, for LMDC, supported by MAURITIUS, emphasized that developed countries’ emission reductions should be based on domestic actions and called for delivery of means of implementation. He opposed considering HFCs under the Montreal Protocol.

BRAZIL agreed with the need for structural changes in the economy and for low-carbon investment choices, but underscored that developed countries need to take the lead.

On the way forward to COP 19, Nauru, for AOSIS, supported by NEPAL, INDONESIA and KENYA, proposed: submissions, including on energy policies and technologies with emphasis on the scale of emission reductions, barriers and strategies to overcome those barriers; a technical paper compiling parties’ submissions on specific problems they face, with corresponding solutions from technical expert meetings; a technical workshop; and a ministerial roundtable at COP 19. The PHILLIPINES suggested broadening the proposal to also cover adaptation.

On technical workshops, VENEZUELA said it would be more useful to discuss “normative trends,” pilot practices and means to facilitate a paradigm shift.

The EU outlined expectations for COP 19, including: encouraging new pledges and increasing ambition of existing pledges with developed countries in the lead; a decision on phasing out HFCs; elaborating the role of the UNFCCC in catalyzing international initiatives; and linking the UNFCCC to other processes, including the 2014 UN Leaders Summit.

CHINA called for revisiting Annex I QELROs and inviting Annex I parties not participating in the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol to undertake comparable targets. He underscored COP 19 should focus on finance. SAUDI ARABIA highlighted: a comprehensive approach that includes a variety of actions; and the application of the Convention’s principles and provisions.

Mali, for the AFRICAN GROUP, said parties should not focus on a particular option or sector. On the COP 19 outcome, she called for: a process to review support from Annex I parties; clarity on the delivery of the US$100 billion of annual long-term finance; and options to strengthen the price of carbon.

LINKAGES (ADP Workstream 1): In the afternoon ADP workshop, BRAZIL presented on the their proposal, highlighting that the Brazilian proposal addresses historical responsibility not just in terms of emissions, but also in terms of relative historical contributions to the temperature increase. Calling for further work on the proposal, he suggested that the SBSTA: invite the IPCC to carry out methodological work; invite parties to provide estimates of their historical emissions; and form an expert group to measure developed countries’ contributions to the temperature increase.

On linkages, INDIA stressed the need to establish linkages between ADP Workstreams 1 and 2, and to consider how the work of the Subsidiary Bodies, the IPCC and the 2013-2015 Review will inform the 2015 agreement. The EU called for submissions on the necessary mitigation and adaptation elements in the 2015 agreement. ECUADOR called for a focus on linkages between gaps in mitigation, finance, technology and adaptation. SWITZERLAND stressed the need to link the new agreement with: scientific reality, looking beyond fossil fuel emissions; and political reality, looking forward beyond adaption and public funding. The US advocated a new agreement that: is concise, applicable to all and durable; builds on experiences and practices under the Convention; allows focus on operationalization of elements rather than structural renegotiations; and is sellable to a broad audience of domestic constituencies.

DIALOGUE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DOHA WORK PORGRAMME ON CONVENTION ARTICLE 6 (education, training and public awareness): The dialogue was co-facilitated by Adriana Valenzuela (Dominican Republic) and Richard Merzian (Australia).

During a panel discussion on strategic approaches and long-term planning of climate change education, delegates highlighted: capacity needs assessments; incorporating climate change into school curricula; and a bottom-up approach to assessing educational needs. On ways to ensure sustainability of results and long-term impact of national strategies, Amanda Katilin Niode, Indonesia, emphasized capacity to coordinate interagency activities and review implementation at the national level as challenges. On translating international policies into national action, participants emphasized the Doha work programme on Convention Article 6 as being at the core of coordinating national responses.

On challenges, good practices and lessons learned from the implementation of climate change education at the national level, Jogeeswar Seewoobaduth, Mauritius, presented recommendations from the Expert Meeting on Climate Change Education (CCE) for Sustainable Development in Africa. He highlighted linking global and local perspectives, and addressing adaptation and mitigation through African education systems. Mats Kullberg, Sweden, identified the CCE as a tool for achieving national and international objectives, highlighting a case study on communicating environmental actions to children and youth. Frank Niepold provided a US perspective on challenges, good practices and lessons learned from national implementation of the CCE, emphasizing an audience-focused, community-based approach through partnerships between science and educational organizations.

Harriet Thew, World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGGS), discussed her organization’s collaborative, multidisciplinary, three-pronged ‘Learn, Speak Out, Take Action’ approach. Pasang Dolma Sherpa, International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change (IIPFCC), Nepal, provided an overview of a global partnership initiative on CCE and training in Asia, Africa and Latin America in partnership with TEBTEBBA. Highlighting education as a driver for change, Rixa Schwarz, Centre for Environment Education, discussed her organization’s approach of solution-orientated action towards sustainability through hands-on projects.

On measuring for results, Makoto Kato, Japan, presented on measuring the effectiveness of climate change education in his country. Bubu Pateh Jallow, the Gambia, spoke about results-based educational activities, including a rainwater harvesting project in schools in the Seychelles. Participants also considered, inter alia: ex ante and ex post measurement of effectiveness, including milestone setting, information gathering and expert review; and setting baselines for climate change education.

RESULTS-BASED FINANCE FOR THE FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF ACTIVITIES IN DECISION       1/CP.16, PARAGRAPH 70 (REDD+):  During an afternoon workshop on REDD+, Yaw Osafo, Ghana, identified issues for further discussion, including: scope of results-based actions; clarifying the “plus” in REDD+; guidance to the GCF Board; and the need to elaborate institutional arrangements. 

The EU outlined unique features of REDD+ results-based finance, including that: it is land-based; covers large areas; affects livelihoods; deals with complex drivers; and necessitates safeguards. He highlighted outstanding issues, such as the relationship between reference levels and incentive levels, and the need to track results-based payments to avoid double counting. 

GHANA identified challenges with accessing funding, highlighting uncoordinated support and lack of a national registry of REDD+ actions and support. He underscored that financial institutions’ different criteria, standards and modalities complicate access to funding. He stressed the need to, inter alia: balance methodological requirements against financial needs; have a credible tracking system; and for the GCF to catalyze finance from public and private sources.

INDONESIA suggested that bilateral and multilateral initiatives focus on strengthening existing activities, filling gaps and avoiding duplication, as well as enhancing stakeholders’ capacities at the national level.

AUSTRALIA highlighted the potential of private financing, calling for enabling environments and reducing investment risks. She said payments should be based on delivered products, in this case avoided emissions. She stressed that UNFCCC decisions need to provide flexibility for countries to decide on national REDD+ aspects.

COSTA RICA presented on the national payment for environmental services (PES) scheme, noting that their experiences: consider non-carbon benefits; draw from different sources of funding; and compensate for a variety of forest-related activities. He highlighted that predictable finance is “a must” to make national decisions.

During discussion, BOLIVIA highlighted the joint mitigation and adaptation approach with ex ante finance. GUYANA stressed, inter alia, that payments need to come from a variety of sources and identified the need for a new international architecture that promotes coherence and consistency of financing. CHINA stressed the importance of predictability of finance and scaling up REDD+ finance, especially from public sources. PAPUA NEW GUINEA stressed that developing countries need clarity on sustainable finance and highlighted the importance of good governance. Switzerland, for the EIG, indicated that COP guidance should not create additional burdens for REDD+ finance and identified the need to fill the gap between fast start and long-term financing. BRAZIL underlined the need to discuss the ways and means of finance after results have been fully monitored, reported and verified. The EU highlighted engagement with local communities as a way to reduce risks and stated that finance should come from a variety of sources.

On expectations for COP 19, COLOMBIA called for an architecture for financing results-based action that links what is unique to REDD+, such as safeguards to finance and bodies, such as the GCF. NORWAY called for a COP decision linking REDD+ to financial mechanisms and urged that these mechanisms be capitalized. THAILAND and DOMINICA called for a REDD+ governance body under the COP.

Civil society organizations discussed REDD+ finance architecture, the role of markets, the importance of safeguards and the need for timely and adequate payments.


As negotiations resumed on Monday, informal consultations in the Friends of the Chair group continued on the SBI agenda without reaching a successful outcome. Emerging from the room, one delegate said “enough is enough,” proclaiming that the only way forward now would be to resume discussions in a plenary setting.

While delegates continue attempts to thrash out how to continue work under the SBI and ADP, international media attention, notably absent from Bonn, focused on the new International Energy Agency report, indicating that GHG emissions from fossil fuel use rose to record levels in 2012 and warning that the world is heading for between 3.6°C and 5.3°C warming – way above the agreed UNFCCC target of keeping the global average temperature rise below 2°C from pre-industrial times. The report also urges countries and companies to, among other things: implement aggressive energy-efficiency measures; reduce the release of methane in oil and gas operations; and phase out fossil-fuel subsidies.

On a lighter note, a GRULAC lunchtime meeting was successful in agreeing that Peru will host COP 20 and the pre-COP will be held in Venezuela. This led a few delegates to joke about the post-meeting rush to Machu Picchu to wind down after what may well turn out to be a hectic 2014 meeting.

Further information