There are only two days left till COP18 winds down. Yesterday night the negotiations went on till the wee hours of the morning only to remain at a complete deadlock.
Developed countries, especially US, continued to predictably block any significant movement within the negotiations, especially within the LCA.
The Long Term Cooperative Action track (LCA) scheduled to close this year, was born out of the Bali Platform. It was based on five pillars — shared vision for long-term cooperative action including global reduction of emissions, finances, to help mitigation, adaptation and technology development & transfer to tackle climate change. However, there has been little movement on these issues.
Key make or break points in LCA: Finance. No substantial development. A 100 billion dollars per yer by 2020 pledge had been agreed upon in Copenhagen, and in the intermediate time a “Fast Track Finance” had been set up. This was done to enable developing countries to access funds till 2020. Fast Track Finance also ends this year. So the finance situation from 2013 - 2020 still hangs in the balance. Dubbed the ‘fiscal cliff’ by the media, it’s a major make or break point for the developing countries, who will otherwise be left without funding till 2020.
Some countries, like UK (1.7 billion) have pledged. But BASIC made it very clear it’s certainly not enough, other countries need to come forward, and there’s still no clarity on how or whether this will be consistent through to 2020. US is yet to make a pledge.
The second make or break point comes under adaptation. Loss and Damage (L&D). Efforts are on to create a mechanism for compensation for losses and damages already unfolding as a result on climate change, rather, as a result of having inadequately dealt with it over the last 2 decades. Most, if not all, of this loss and damage is felt in the developing world. And it puts the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the developed world, because, unlike most other topics in discussion within the UNFCCC process, they can not pass on blame/responsibility for loss and damage to the developing world. It is certainly the effect of their emissions, their actions, and thus brings historical responsibility into sharp focus. The US is especially adamant on this issue, and seem determined to stall it.
And finally, on technology. Intellectual property rights (IPR) is a big bone of contention. The US is absolutely unwilling to budge from their position and even talk about IPR, let alone allow it to enter the LCA text. Without IPR most countries of the developing world will be unable to have access to cheap renewable energy. This will only increase emissions, as they continue to rely on dirty fossil fuel based energy to develop.
The first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (KP) - the only legally binding agreement that sets binding targets for countries, is set to expire in Doha and the second commitment period must be agreed upon.
US had left the Protocol long back, and Canada has also jumped ship. Others like Russia, Japan, New Zealand have decided to stay in the 2nd commitment period, but not make any pledges to reduce emissions. This move is clearly so that they can continue to benefit from various financial mechanisms within the KP, while taking no responsibility themselves. Bolivia from the developing quarters had been a particularly strong critic of this.
Arguably, the most contentious issue under the KP is the carryover of carbon credits by developed countries. Poland seems to be singlehandedly holding the EU back from increasing their emissions cut pledges, and giving up surplus carbon credits in the second commitment period of Kyoto Protocol. They are determined to carry their remaining credits over. Despite their blocking and negative attitude, to the annoyance of many civil society observers and environmentalists, they have been declared the hosts for the next COP.
Key make or break point in KP: A fair and ‘balanced’ 2nd commitment period. No commitment is not an option for the developing nations.
The closing of the LCA brings into being the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP). All parties insist that talks around the ADP are going very well. However, it’s anyone’s guess where it’s going really. Without movement in LCA and KP, ADP will hang in balance.
Given the delicate nature of this transition from one track to the other, from one commitment period to the other, a lack of ambition and leadership is a pressing necessity. However, both are still to be seen here at Doha. Even the Presidency of Qatar has come under criticism for the lack of leadership and direction.
Particularly, the creation of ‘green rooms’ has been a cause of worry. This entails two parties, one developing, one developed, leading closed room discussions on contentious issues. It’s not an inclusive process, and as seen in Copenhagen most prominently, and can lead to an unfair deal.
Currently, those in-charge are:
- Norway and Brazil on Kyoto Protocol amendments.
- South Africa on Loss and Damage.
- Switzerland and the Maldives on financing decisions.
- Australia is working with Gambia on reporting guidelines.
Negotiating behind closed doors does not build confidence. There’s both fear of complete derailment and hope for a balanced outcome here in the corridors of Doha. Whatever happens will rapidly unfold in the next 24 hours or so.
Stay tuned for updates!