Curtain raiser
UNFCCC COP 2
The Second Conference of the Parties (COP-2) to the Framework Convention on ClimateChange begins today in Geneva. The COPs four subsidiary bodies are also expected tohold sessions throughout the two week session. The Ministerial Segment to COP-2 will beheld 17-18 July.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CONVENTION
Increasing scientific evidence in the 1980s about the possibility of global climate changeled to a growing consensus that human activities have been contributing to substantialincreases in the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. In response, on 11December 1990, the 45th session of the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution thatestablished the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Conventionon Climate Change (INC/FCCC). Supported by UNEP and WMO, the mandate of theINC/FCCC was to prepare an effective framework convention on climate change. TheINC held five sessions between February 1991 and May 1992. The UN FrameworkConvention on Climate Change was adopted on 9 May 1992, and was opened forsignature at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in June 1992 in Rio deJaneiro, where it received 155 signatures. The Convention entered into force on 21 March1994, 90 days after receipt of the 50th ratification, and has been ratified by almost 160countries.
The first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention onClimate Change (COP-1) took place in Berlin from 28 March - 7 April 1995. Delegatescame to agreement on what many believed to be the central issue before COP-1 adequacy of commitments. The result was a mandate to launch a process towardappropriate action for the period beyond the year 2000, including the strengthening of thecommitments of developed countries. Delegates also reached agreement on a number ofother important issues, including the establishment of a pilot phase for implementation ofjoint projects, the location of the Permanent Secretariat in Bonn, Germany, the budget forthe Secretariat, financial procedures and the establishment of the subsidiary bodies.Delegates, however, did not reach consensus on the rules of procedure. This critical issue,including a decision on the voting rules and the composition of the Bureau, was deferreduntil COP-2.
HIGHLIGHTS SINCE COP-1
COP-1 established an open-ended Ad Hoc Group on the Berlin Mandate (AGBM)through decision FCCC/CP/1995/7/Add.1/ Decision 1/CP.1. In this decision, known as theBerlin Mandate", the COP agreed to begin a process to strengthen the commitments onthe part of industrialized countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions beyond the year2000 through the adoption of a protocol or other legal instrument.
At its first session (AGBM-1), held in Geneva from 21-25 August 1995, delegatesconsidered several issues, including an analysis and assessment to identify possible policiesand measures for Annex I Parties and requests for inputs to subsequent sessions. Theydebated the nature, content and duration of the analysis and assessment and its relationshipto other aspects of the process. Several developed and developing countries stressed thatanalysis and assessment should be conducted in parallel and not prior to the negotiations,but a few developing countries held that more time was needed, particularly to evaluateeconomic costs. (See Earth Negotiations Bulletin Vol. 12 No. 22.). At AGBM-2,held in Geneva from 30 October - 3 November 1995, debate over the extent of analysisand assessment continued, but delegates also heard new ideas for the structure and formof a possible protocol. Delegates considered: strengthening of commitments in Article 4.2(a) and (b) regarding policies and measures, as well as quantified emission limitation andreduction objectives within specified time-frames; advancing the implementation of Article4.1; and possible features of a protocol or other legal instrument. (See EarthNegotiations Bulletin Vol. 12 No. 24.).
At AGBM-3, held in Geneva from 5-8 March 1996, delegates heard a number of new,specific proposals on new commitments for Annex I Parties, including a two-phase CO2emissions reduction target proposed by Germany. They also discussed how Annex Icountries might distribute or share new commitments, and whether those should take theform of an amendment or protocol. Developing countries raised questions on whetherpolicies and measures under discussion would represent barriers to trade. Delegatesagreed to compile proposals for new commitments for consideration at AGBM-4, and tohold informal roundtable discussions on policies and measures as well as on quantitativeemissions limitation and reduction objectives.
AD HOC GROUP ON THE BERLIN MANDATE
COP-1 established an open-ended Ad Hoc Group on the Berlin Mandate (AGBM)through decision FCCC/CP/1995/7/Add.1/ Decision 1/CP.1. In this decision, known as theBerlin Mandate", the COP agreed to begin a process to strengthen the commitments onthe part of industrialized countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions beyond the year2000 through the adoption of a protocol or other legal instrument.
At its first session (AGBM-1), held in Geneva from 21-25 August 1995, delegatesconsidered several issues, including an analysis and assessment to identify possible policiesand measures for Annex I Parties and requests for inputs to subsequent sessions. Theydebated the nature, content and duration of the analysis and assessment and its relationshipto other aspects of the process. Several developed and developing countries stressed thatanalysis and assessment should be conducted in parallel and not prior to the negotiations,but a few developing countries held that more time was needed, particularly to evaluateeconomic costs. (See Earth Negotiations Bulletin Vol. 12 No. 22.). At AGBM-2,held in Geneva from 30 October - 3 November 1995, debate over the extent of analysisand assessment continued, but delegates also heard new ideas for the structure and formof a possible protocol. Delegates considered: strengthening of commitments in Article 4.2(a) and (b) regarding policies and measures, as well as quantified emission limitation andreduction objectives within specified time-frames; advancing the implementation of Article4.1; and possible features of a protocol or other legal instrument. (See EarthNegotiations Bulletin Vol. 12 No. 24.).
At AGBM-3, held in Geneva from 5-8 March 1996, delegates heard a number of new,specific proposals on new commitments for Annex I Parties, including a two-phase CO2emissions reduction target proposed by Germany. They also discussed how Annex Icountries might distribute or share new commitments, and whether those should take theform of an amendment or protocol. Developing countries raised questions on whetherpolicies and measures under discussion would represent barriers to trade. Delegatesagreed to compile proposals for new commitments for consideration at AGBM-4, and tohold informal roundtable discussions on policies and measures as well as on quantitativeemissions limitation and reduction objectives.
SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL ADVICE (SBSTA)
The SBSTA was established by COP-1 to link scientific, technical and technologicalassessments, information provided by competent international bodies, and the policy-oriented needs of the COP. The first meeting of the SBSTA (SBSTA-1) was held inGeneva from 28-30 August 1995. Delegates confronted technically and politicallycomplex issues, including: scientific assessments, national communications from Annex IParties, methodologies, first communications from non-Annex I Parties, and activitiesimplemented jointly under the pilot phase. The SBSTA also was to establishintergovernmental technical advisory panels on technologies (TAP-T) and methodologies(TAP-M), however, it did not have time to consider all of these issues. Among the morecontentious issues were: definition of the SBSTAs relationship with the IPCC, the termsof reference and composition of the TAPs and the elaboration of guidelines for nationalcommunications from non-Annex I Parties. Delegates successfully identified areas forcooperation with the IPCC, agreed on a division of labor with the SBI on technologytransfer issues, and requested the Secretariat to organize a workshop on non-governmental inputs. However, no progress was made on the formation of the TAPs anddelegates had to resume this discussion at SBSTA-2.
SBSTA-2, held in Geneva from 27 February through 4 March 1996, considered scientificassessment and cooperation, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes(IPCC) Second Assessment Report (SAR), reporting by Annex I and non-Annex I Parties,activities implemented jointly (AIJ) and the Technical Advisory Panels (TAPs). The mainresult was that Parties documented that they could not yet agree on how to absorb orrespond to scientific predictions of climate change. Although initial discussions gave theimpression that SBSTA-2 would greet the IPCCs predictions with less resistance than inprevious FCCC negotiations, oil producers and other developing countries ultimatelyblocked consensus on specific conclusions about the IPCC Second Assessment Report.Weekend negotiations resulted in a fragile agreement on language defining the divergenceof opinion. Three paragraphs in the SBSTAs report list points of contention, alternatelyhighlighting the urgency and uncertainty in the IPCC report of a discernible humaninfluence on climate change. One line of the SBSTAs conclusions tells the story onTAPs: at this stage SBSTA could not agree on modalities.
SUBSIDIARY BODY ON IMPLEMENTATION (SBI)
The first meeting of the SBI (SBI-1) took place from 31 August - 1 September 1995 inGeneva. The SBI addressed: communications from Annex I Parties; a progress report onin-depth review; institutional and budgetary matters; matters relating to the financialmechanism; and the elaboration and scheduling of the programme of work for 1996-1997.Delegates rapidly adopted the SBIs work programme and recommended that the COPadopt the draft Memorandum of Understanding with the GEF as the financial mechanism,and proposed a draft decision on this item to be adopted by COP-2.
At SBI-2, held in Geneva from 27 February through 4 March 1996, delegates consideredin-depth reviews of national communications, matters related to the financial mechanism,financial and technical cooperation, transfer of technology, arrangements for the relocationof the Secretariat to Bonn and COP-2. SBI-2 delegates could claim some measurableprogress, yet comments on the floor frequently highlighted what had not been done toimplement the Convention. While delegates welcomed the GEF Councils adoption of itsoperational strategy, many noted the need to expedite the process of providing fullagreed costs for non-Annex I communications or risk serious delays. Developingcountries frequently noted that providing funds to the GEF and providing funds tocountries were not the same thing. The SBIs review of in-depth reports revealed thatmany delegations found the national communications in need of comparability andconsistency. The problem of membership distribution provoked several lengthy debates onthe composition of the Bureau, a question pending since COP-1. Despite numerousconsultations the issue remains outstanding.
AD HOC GROUP ON ARTICLE 13
At its first session, the Ad Hoc Group on Article 13 decided to request Parties, non-parties, and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations to make writtensubmissions in response to a questionnaire on a multilateral consultative process(FCCC/AG13/1995/2, para. 17). Nineteen Parties, one non-party and ten NGOs submittedresponses, which were compiled in documents FCCC/AG13/1996/MISC.1 and MISC.2.The documents provide a spectrum of views on the multilateral consultative process andidentify common areas of understanding.
RELATED PROCEEDINGS
REGIONAL CONFERENCE ON JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN COUNTRIES INTRANSITION: This conference, held 17-19 April 1996 in Prague, brought togethermore than 100 officials from government agencies of Annex I Countries, internationalorganizations and representatives from science, industry and NGOs. The participantsdiscussed the positions of Annex I countries on joint implementation, experiences gainedat the project level, new proposals for projects, and the calculation of baseline andmitigation costs (including the costs of carbon sequestration). For more informationcontact Dr. Milos Tichy, SEVEn, T: +42 2 24247552, F: +42 2 24247552, e-mail:milos.tichy@ecn.cnz. Internet at http://www.ji.org.
WORKSHOP ON JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN NORTH AMERICA: TheCommission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) sponsored the first North Americanworkshop on Joint Implementation on 17 April 1996 in Mexico City. Participants sharedinformation about national efforts, potential projects, and investment and financingopportunities for regional implementation. A series of four project case studies waspresented and comment was provided by a number of leading experts. For informationcontact: Lynn M. Fischer, Climate Change Program Manager, CEC, 393 rue St. JacquesOuest, Bureau 200, Montreal, Quebec H2X 2Y6, Canada, T: +1 514 350-4300, F:+1 514350-4314, e-mail: lfischer@ccemtl.org or fischerl@msn.com.
THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY
PLENARY: COP-1 President Dr. Angela Merkel (Germany) is expected to openthe Conference this morning in the General Assembly Hall. Delegates are expected to electthe President of COP-2, President-Designate H.E. Chen Chimutengwende (Zimbabwe),and to hear statements from UNFCCC Executive Secretary Michael Zammit Cutajar, NitinDesai (DPCSD), Elizabeth Dowdeswell (UNEP), Bert Bolin (IPCC), as well asrepresentatives from WMO, GEF, CSD, IAA, IEA and the Swiss Government. Delegatesare expected to address organizational matters.