15122
AWG-LCA concludes its work in Doha
Doha, 11 Dec (Hilary Chiew and Meena Raman) – After five years since its launch in 2007 to advance an agreed outcome under the Bali Action Plan, the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA) ended its work with the forwarding of the outcome document prepared by its Chair, to the 18
th
meeting of the UNFCCC’s Conference of Parties (COP 18) on Friday, 7 Deember. The outcome document of the AWG-LCA was not adopted by Parties at the working group level, but there was agreement to forward the text of the outcome of its work to the COP for further consideration, as suggested by its Chair, Aysar Tayeb (Saudi Arabia). Tayeb informed Parties at the conclusion of the plenary held on 7 December that ministers of Singapore and Germany will conduct consultations on matters under the AWG-LCA. In the 22-page proposed text by the AWG-LCA Chair which was a clean text with no brackets and options, the page on finance was blank with a note that read: “
Pending the results from the ministerial consultations”.
On 4 December, the COP President Abdullah Hamad Al-Attiyah launched ministerial consultations by appointing the ministers of Switzerland and Maldives to conduct bilateral consultations to find solutions on matters related to finance. The closing session of COP 18, initially scheduled for the evening of 7 December was postponed while bilateral informal consultations between ministers and Parties proceeded behind the scenes throughout the night on the AWG-LCA text. When the revised document was presented by the COP President in the morning of 8 December (called “revised proposal by the President”), there was text on finance, which urges all developed country Parties to scale up climate finance to the joint-goal of mobilising USD 100 billion per year by 2020 and for developed countries to further increase their efforts to provide resources of at least to the average annual level of the fast-start finance period for 2013-2015. This revised proposal by the President of the AWG-LCA outcome of work was adopted by Parties as part of the Doha package. In the area of technology transfer, the final text had no explicit reference to the issue of intellectual property rights (IPRs). The earlier text from the AWG-LCA Chair’s document provided for the Technology Executive Committee (in paragraph 64), “in elaborating its future workplan, to initiate the exploration of options for implementing the following activities … with a view to recommending appropriate actions for consideration by the Conference of the Parties at its twentieth session: (a) Examining effective mechanisms that promote access to affordable environmentally sound technologies, reward innovators and increase the dynamic of global innovation; …” Developed countries including the US and EU, had during the closing AWG-LCA plenary objected to the language in paragraph 64, as referring to the IPR regime and wanted its deletion. The final text adopted by Parties has reference to “the exploration of issues relating to enabling environments and barriers including to those issues referred to in the report of the Technology Executive Committee (TEC).” [Paragraph 35 – in sub-para (g) of the TEC report states that IPRs were identified as an area for which more clarity would be needed on their role in the development and transfer of climate technologies based upon evidence on a case by case basis. Thus the link to work on IPRs was
TWN Doha Update No. 21
11 December 2012
2
made in a circuitous way to avoid the use of the term in the AWG-LCA outcome document] On unilateral measures, the earlier text of the Chair was watered down. The Chair’s text in paragraph 57 requested “the Chairs of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation to convene, at their thirty-eighth sessions, a joint round-table discussion on unilateral measures in the context of Article 3, paragraph 5, of the Convention.” The final decision in paragraph 54 welcomed “
the progress made in the work of the forum on the impact of the implementation of response measures being convened under the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation” and invited “Parties to continue to participate in the forum, including the sharing of views on policy issues of concern, such as unilateral measures.” Developed countries during the negotiations were resistant to having any text on unilateral measures. On cooperative sectoral approaches and sector specific actions, the final decision adopted had no text on this matter. In the earlier version of the AWG-LCA’s Chair’s text, there was reference to paragraph 42, which several developing countries in the Like-minded developing countries wanted deleted, as it was not consistent with Article 2.2 of the Kyoto Protocol. (Para 42 of the document states: “
Also agrees that the limitation or reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol from international aviation and maritime transport should be pursued in a multilateral manner, working through the International Civil Aviation Organisation and the International Maritime Organisation, respectively.
Article 2.2 of the KP which only applies to developed countries in Annex 1 states that “
The Parties included in Annex I shall pursue limitation or reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol from aviation and marine bunker fuels, working through the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Maritime Organization, respectively”
.) During the final plenary of the AWG-LCA, both developed and developing countries registered their dissatisfaction with the 7 December text from the outset, and called for improvements with the former actively seeking ministerial intervention. The smooth closing plenary of the AWG-LCA caught many Parties by surprise in the afternoon of 7 December with no objections to the Chair’s proposal to forward the final document of the working group to the COP 18 for consideration and adoption. Hesitating for a minute, Tayeb jokingly asked the Secretariat’s staff if he should go ahead to gavel the decision before he brought down the gavel. The European Union was prompted to seek confirmation that the decision was to forward the text for further consideration by the COP and Bangladesh said that it had wanted elaboration of the mechanism to facilitate access to climate technology for Least Developed Countries (LDC). Tayeb confirmed that the text was not adopted but only the decision to forward it for further consideration by the COP. Following statements by groupings of Parties and countries, Tayeb noted the many reservations on the text. He said it was extremely striking that reservations are on the same issues but from opposite direction, adding that Parties were at the last stretch of a journey and that he had done his utmost best. He believed that Parties are close to the finishing line and under the guidance of the ministers, they will be able to cross the line. Several developing country Parties also recorded their appreciation for the leadership of Tayeb throughout the two weeks of tough negotiations.
Algeria representing the Group of 77 and China (G77-China)
reiterated that a successful outcome lies in the issue of finance in which there must be clarity and certainty for the coming years to meet the need of developing countries in light of the imposition on them from previous decisions of Cancun (COP 16, 2010) and Durban (COP 17, 2011). In particular, it said clarity is needed for the financial resources gap from 2012 to 2020 besides other issues such as adaptation, mitigation and technology transfer. Equally important, said the G77 and China is the ability of developing countries to engage first on adaptation then mitigation, expressing wariness at the emptiness of the various institutions set up with no effects on the ground. It further expressed concerns on the lack of progress on adaptation and technology transfer as expressed
TWN Doha Update No. 21
11 December 2012
3
by several members of the group and is grateful for the advancement of the AWG-LCA work despite the lack of flexibility shown by partners (referring to Annex I Parties). It remained committed to all outstanding issues to be addressed appropriately in order to achieve a result that will fulfil the mandate of the Bali Action Plan (BAP).
The Philippines speaking for the Like-Minded Group of Developing Countries
reminded Parties that they extended the AWG-LCA, not merely to close it, but to do meaningful work on all the unresolved issues to reach an ambitious, meaningful and comprehensive agreed outcome. The agreed outcome must comprehensively address all the elements contained in the BAP as an essential element for the success of Doha which was one of the components of the Durban Package. Parties must address all the elements under AWG-LCA including ambitious and comparable emission reduction targets by the developed country Parties, adaptation, finance, technology transfer and capacity building. The creation of institutions for many of these issues reflect excellent progress but does not necessarily close the issues themselves, particularly as the key political issues of operationalizing these institutions remained unaddressed referring to means of implementation for developing countries. Developed countries, it said, should rise to their historical responsibilities and honour their commitment to provide developing countries with financing, technology transfer and capacity building support and to finance the effective operationalisation of the institutional mechanisms. As such, it noted that the text that the Chair had forwarded to the COP for its consideration could be further improved. The text, it said, did not reflect the full and equitable and ambitious outcome that it was looking for. In this regard, it flagged the following issues:
•
The finance element in the final agreed outcome must be meaningful and substantive, with clear commitments on mid-term financing and a process in place to increase ambition on financing, clarity and assurance needs to be made in relation to the provision of the means of implementation to meet the cost of new responsibilities that are being put on developing countries. There is need for clarity on mid-term finance; need to examine lessons learned from fast-start finance to see it has fulfilled commitments from Copenhagen; need to establish mechanisms for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of developed countries financial and technology support for developing countries;
•
Mitigation ambition needed to be strengthened, particularly for Annex I Parties, including with respect to ensuring the comparability of their mitigation efforts and to increase their emission reduction pledges;
•
The Technology transfer text needs to be strengthened. In particular, the failure of the text to address intellectual property rights (IPR) issues in the AWG-LCA is a serious concern as IPRs constitute a significant obstacle to successful technology transfer;
•
On cooperative sectoral approaches and sector specific actions, in paragraph 42 needed to be made consistent with Article 2.2 of the Kyoto Protocol, and should not result in any reinterpretation or changing of the scope of such provision. This paragraph should be deleted;
•
On adaptation, there is very weak linkage to climate financing. This gap needs to be addressed;
•
The text on capacity building is very weak. The G77 had called for a work programme, but the text does not reflect any strengthened modalities for capacity building. The Philippines said Parties talk about balance but in its view, it must be the balance among the building blocks of the BAP – mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology and capacity building. It further emphasized that where there is no text, it doesn’t equate to agreement or conclusion. Lastly, it thanked the Chair for his guidance and leadership which had enabled constructive work to be done during the 15
th
session of the AWG-LCA.
Nauru speaking for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)
noted that Parties have agreed to the text to be transmitted to the COP for further consideration and that the text is a decent basis to work from. It would like to see