Report of main proceedings for 21 May 2016
Bonn Climate Change Conference - May 2016
On Saturday, the Bonn Climate Change Conference continued with many informal consultations under the SBI and SBSTA, as well as APA consultations on the organization of work. In-session workshops on linkages between the Technology Mechanism and Financial Mechanism, and the FSV under the ICA process also convened in the morning. A stocktaking event convened in the afternoon.
ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS: Organization of work: Co-Chair Jo Tyndall outlined the Co-Chairs’ proposal to: meet in a single contact group on 23 May to consider agenda items 3-7; provide guiding questions by Monday evening for focused and technical discussions on 24 and 25 May; consider item 8 after a Secretariat briefing on the legal implications of early entry into force; and discuss outcomes of the session on Wednesday, which could include calls for submissions and intersessional work, including technical workshops.
Parties generally welcomed the proposal. Some suggested holding two parallel contact groups and others warned against having more than two concurrent meetings. While some supported holding intersessional workshops, others raised concerns over financial implications and participation. Others feared that APA workshops would lead to items under the SBs not progressing in coherence with those under the APA. The Co-Chairs will inform on the mode of work on 23 May in the morning and start work.
COP PRESIDENTS’ STOCKTAKING
In the stocktaking event to ensure coherence and comprehensiveness in implementation, COP 21 President Ségolène Royal suggested the development of a roadmap to identify where progress was, and was not, made. She added the roadmap should identify why progress was slower in some areas and develop a methodology to move all issues forward in a consistent manner.
Calling COP 22, an “action COP,” Hakima El Haité, incoming COP 22 Presidency, informed that the COP 22 Presidency would convene informal consultations to reassure parties of the ongoing coordination and balance among the different bodies’ work.
SBSTA Chair Carlos Fuller noted consensus to defer deliberations on the scope of the periodic review to allow the APA to discuss the global stocktake. SBI Chair Tomasz Chruszczcow noted that mandated events help improve coherence across crosscutting issues.
APA Co-Chair Sarah Baashan called for a coordinated approach with the subsidiary bodies on issues such as the adaptation communications and their registry.
The constituted bodies of the UNFCCC, the GEF and IPCC reported on their work related to the Paris outcome.
Thailand, for the G-77/CHINA, urged balance and coherence across the APA and SBs. He said the Group expects to see “substantial” elaboration of the PCCB for adoption at COP 22. Colombia, for AILAC, and Malaysia, for the LMDCs, emphasized work on the 2018 facilitative dialogue.
Australia, for the UMBRELLA GROUP, called for discussions on early entry into force, with Maldives, for AOSIS, emphasizing the need for an expedited entry into force.
The EU called for clarity on questions requiring further work, with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for the LDCs, specifying the need for clarity on how to take stock of progress. Switzerland, for the EIG, supported intersessional workshops and the LDCs identified areas for technical workshops.
Referring to SBI agenda items 5 (NDC registry) and 6 (adaptation communications registry), Mali, for the AFRICAN GROUP, requested they be considered back-to-back and be led by the same co-facilitators, adding “we are working towards one NDC registry, rather than two.”
YOUNGOs welcomed work at this session on ACE and the Durban Forum on Capacity-building.
CAN called for identifying deliverables for COP 22, including the facilitative dialogue’s modalities.
CJN! urged giving adaptation and mitigation equal importance.
Laurence Tubiana, COP 21 Presidency, identified the need for a clear vision on the COP 22 work programme, and El Haité, underlined the importance of equality and cooperation among all the subsidiary bodies.
MODALITIES FOR ACCOUNTING FINANCIAL RESOURCES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 9.7: After making minor editorial changes to the Co-Chairs’ draft conclusions in informal consultations, and after the Secretariat’s confirmation of the availability of financial resources for the activities to be undertaken, parties agreed to the draft. The draft conclusions, inter alia: invite parties and observers to submit views by 29 August; request the organization of a workshop at SBSTA 45; and request the Secretariat to prepare a technical paper before SBSTA 46 summarizing the workshop information and submissions.
ORGANIZATION OF WORK: FSV under the ICA process: The FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA underscored difficulties in ensuring continuous GHG measurement, given a lack of consistent data flows, and in developing a domestic MRV system.
TUNISIA reported an average annual 2.2% decrease in carbon intensity since 1994 and noted the usefulness of the ICA process. Noting little difficulty in accessing data, he indicated that data collection had effectively involved the private sector.
VIET NAM announced that its national MRV system would be operational before 2020. She reported challenges for BUR preparation, including securing timely funding, and quantifying technological and capacity-building support.
MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION AND USE OF A PUBLIC REGISTRY REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 7.12: In informal consultations, parties discussed organization of work. Parties diverged on whether this item on an adaptation communications registry and SBI item 5 (NDC registry) should be taken up in a single contact group. Some parties stressed NDCs as vehicles for reporting on adaptation communications, cautioning against duplication of efforts. Others called for two different spaces for discussion, emphasizing the SBI agenda was a “delicate balance” and pointing to other vehicles for submitting adaptation communications.
Co-Facilitator Georg Børsting (Norway) noted he would convey these views to the SBI Chair. Informal consultations will continue.
MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION AND USE OF A PUBLIC REGISTRY REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 4.12: During informal discussions, parties shared views on the modalities and procedures for the registry, and on the organization of work, where several reiterated calls for a single contact group for this item and work on the adaptation communications registry.
On the registry, many stressed transparency, user-friendliness and public accessibility. One party said the registry should provide a snapshot of key aspects of parties’ NDCs, with another stressing the mandate of the registry is to record, not reorganize, information.
Some proposed a single registry containing information on adaptation and mitigation, possibly divided into two parts. One country suggested discussing objectives prior to form.
Co-Facilitator Gertraud Wollansky (Austria) noted she would convey parties’ views to the SBI Chair. Informal consultations will continue.
NATIONAL ADAPTATION PLANS: In informal consultations, parties considered draft conclusions, primarily discussing a proposed paragraph inviting parties to submit their experiences in accessing the GCF’s readiness funding for NAP preparation. Some opposed the request for submissions given the Adaptation Committee’s expected work and possible interviews with parties on their experiences in 2017. Others said gathering experiences in 2016 would be informative and suggested submissions are more comprehensive than interviews. Co-Facilitator Beth Lavender (Canada) indicated that, with no resolution on this paragraph, this item may not be concluded at SB 44 if another time slot to meet cannot be secured.
CAPACITY BUILDING: In informal consultations, parties shared views on how to draw, for the draft conclusions, from the outcomes of the fifth Durban Forum and the technical paper on the third comprehensive review of the capacity-building framework (FCCC/TP/2016/1).
Countries stressed: country-driven approaches and ownership; impact assessments; institutional capacity building; in-country coordination; and capacity building for access to finance. Parties also emphasized the role of indigenous peoples, women and the private sector in supporting implementation.
Parties suggested requesting that the PCCB: take into account Durban Forum outcomes; coordinate capacity-building activities of other UNFCCC and non-UNFCCC bodies; and prepare standardized tools for reporting and assessment. Consultations will continue.
RESPONSE MEASURES: In informal consultations, parties discussed a work programme proposed by the co-facilitators and a general ToR for future ad hoc technical expert groups.
On the work programme, one group noted the proposal should reflect calls for, inter alia: case studies on capacity building and support; work on a just transition of the workforce to include creation of decent work and quality jobs; partnerships with organizations in the assessment of developing countries’ concerns and needs; and methodology development that takes these concerns into account. Some parties opposed having too many simultaneous materials and submissions. A party underlined the benefits of an open dialogue with stakeholders and taking stock of the substantive work already underway in some organizations.
On a general ToR, one party suggested modalities and composition of the ad hoc technical expert group, including a roster of experts in relevant areas, such as economic, energy, development, climate, labor and social policies. He proposed the group be composed of two experts from international organizations and each regional group, as well as one each from LDCs and SIDS.
WORKSHOP ON LINKAGES BETWEEN THE TECHNOLOGY MECHANISM AND THE FINANCIAL MECHANISM
The TEC, GCF Board, CTCN Advisory Board, and the GEF presented on their work and cross-institutional linkages.
In the session on enhancing cooperation and collaboration between the TEC, CTCN and operating entities of the Financial Mechanism, Antigua and Barbuda suggested the Technology Mechanism could be at the center of market-based mechanisms (Paris Agreement Article 6) if linkages were properly elaborated. Senegal stressed the importance of capacity building of domestic institutions. UNEP identified TNAs as an essential link between the technology bodies and the operating entities of the Financial Mechanism. The TEC emphasized the TEC’s policy guidance role as an important channel for cooperation. The CTCN suggested collaborating at the national level to identify technology options to harness synergies and avoid overlaps. The GCF urged consideration of how linkages can support its business model. The GEF underlined the need to build on lessons learned from pilot projects that address technology transfer barriers.
Participants discussed: challenges faced by SIDS in accessing finance; bankability and project design; need for a committee to coordinate linkages; support for capital-intensive research, development and demonstration; the role of the CTCN as a “matchmaker” to turn the TNAs into bankable projects; and linkages between the GEF and GCF on technology.
IN THE CORRIDORS
On Saturday, delegates arrived content with the prospect of spending an early evening outside the World Conference Center Bonn, which perhaps partly motivated agreement on draft conclusions for a growing number of SBI and SBSTA items.
One delegate was relieved that the APA had not slipped into “ADP mode,” given the steady progress on the organization of work. Meanwhile, in the public registry discussions under the SBI, parties seemed to enter a “jungle” as a metaphor on animals and forests inspired delegates to argue whether the “animals” of mitigation and adaptation should live in the same “forest” of the registry, some asking if the two “species” could coexist.
As delegates left the stocktaking hosted jointly by the COP 21 and 22 Presidencies, a few acknowledged that, so far, SB 44 helped retain the “sense of solidarity that parties carried from Lima and Paris.”