1、 The Copenhagen Accord: A Stepping Stone? January 2010 WWF International, 2010 1986 Panda symbol WWF-World Wide Fund For Nature “WWF” and “Living Planet” are WWF registered trademarks 11.09 (7.5M)Copenhagen Accord a stepping stone? 2 Introduction After the Copenhagen Climate Summit the world still n
2、eeds a fair, ambitious and binding treaty to protect people and nature from runaway climate change. This paper identifies important next steps governments should take on a path towards agreeing such a treaty. First, it assesses the outcome of the Copenhagen Climate Summit and details the strengths a
3、nd weaknesses of the Copenhagen Accord. Then it outlines how the Accord could become an instrument to accelerate progress in the ongoing UN climate negotiations. Finally, the paper identifies some parameters to judge the adequacy of what countries put forward when taking the suggested steps. Summary
4、 The Copenhagen Accord is far from the fair, ambitious and binding deal the world needs to prevent dangerous climate change. Based on an analysis of the Accords strength and weaknesses, however, WWF believes it could become a stepping stone towards a fair, ambitious and binding deal. In WWFs view, t
5、he Accord could inform and advance the UN climate negotiation process, for which a 2010 work plan and schedule must be established quickly. To utilize the Accords potential and to build trust, countries should submit their mitigation actions/targets by 31 January or as soon as possible thereafter. C
6、ountries should also make immediate progress towards operationalizing the funds, mechanisms and guidelines agreed in the Copenhagen Accord. Finally, they have to turn urgent attention to adaptation and adaptation finance, areas where the Copenhagen Accord is disappointing and particularly weak. Thes
7、e issues are hugely important for the most vulnerable countries, as they already suffer from climate impacts and will face major challenges in the near future. Country submissions must be guided by the goal to keep global warming below 2 C, a goal enshrined in the Copenhagen Accord. There is a large
8、 gap between the most ambitious emission cuts pledged to date and the reductions needed to give even a moderate chance to reach the goal. A range of authoritative estimates put the gap in 2020 at around 2 to 5 gigatons CO2e. In 2007, the entire annual emissions of the 27 EU countries were around 5 g
9、igatons. However, the gigatons gap might be even bigger, as current estimates are based on some overly optimistic assumptions so far not matched by reality. Notably, the various studies ignore a series of dangerous loopholes which threaten to undermine the integrity of the targets countries currentl
10、y put forward. This could greatly widen the gigatons gap, according to WWF estimates by perhaps 2 to 3 gigatons. To put the world on course for a safer future, governments must act urgently to close the gap and deliver the “missing gigatons”. This will require more ambitious targets, action to close
11、 off the loopholes and creative thinking to unleash real, concrete actions on the ground. This could increase trust and ambition among parties and lead to agreement on a fair, ambitious and binding treaty in the UN climate process. Copenhagen Accord a stepping stone? 3 1. Whats good and bad about th
12、e Copenhagen Accord? The outcome of the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen consists of three main elements: a political statement dubbed the Copenhagen Accord, detailed draft negotiating texts under the two main working groups of the UN climate process, and a mandate to continue negotiations unde
13、r these two negotiation tracks for one year. In the context of the negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Accord has an uncertain legal legitimacy and lacks political support from some quarters. It has been widely criticized as inadequate and indee
14、d many of those countries that have endorsed it have also expressed disappointment, reservations and regrets about it. In particular, the Accord is weak and disappointing in the areas of adaptation and adaptation finance. It doesnt say how developed countries will support developing countries in dea
15、ling with current and future climate impacts. Nevertheless, the Copenhagen Accord does provide opportunities to make some progress towards an agreement in some difficult and crucial areas. These areas are: Transparency of developing country mitigation actions due to their domestic measurement, repor
16、ting and verification every two years under clearly defined guidelines; Transparency of international financial support for developing countries to tackle climate change (though not clearly saying whether all funding will be new and additional, accessible for the least developed and most vulnerable
17、countries, and also available for adaptation rather than just mitigation action); Reference to keeping global temperature increase to below 2 C (though lacking a basis of comparison, e.g. compared to pre-industrial levels). The Accord also mentions a range of new actions and instruments that will be
18、 established or provided: A mechanism to support REDD-plus, enabling the mobilization of financial resources from developed countries to reduce deforestation in developing countries; New and additional financial resources from developed countries for developing countries, approaching a total of USD
19、30 billion for the period 2010-12 and an annual amount of USD 100 billion by 2020; A High Level Panel under the guidance of and accountable to the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UNFCCC to study the contribution of the potential sources of revenue towards meeting the goal (including alternati
20、ve sources of finance); A Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer in support of action on adaptation and mitigation; Guidelines ensuring that climate actions taken by countries can be internationally measured, reported and verified (MRVed), to be adopted by the COP; A
21、Copenhagen Green Climate Fund under the UNFCCC. Copenhagen Accord a stepping stone? 4 2. How can the Copenhagen Accord become a stepping stone? As it stands, the Copenhagen Accord doesnt even come close to the fair, ambitious and binding deal that WWF and millions globally have been calling for. How
22、ever, if governments build the areas where it moved toward resolution of key issues and resume negotiations with an urgent focus on resolving the remaining issues, it could be a stepping stone towards the strong global climate treaty we need. With every year of delay taking a significant human, ecol
23、ogical and economic toll, it is essential to negotiate a deal that will ensure the survival of nations, communities, species and habitats. WWFs expectations and the planets requirements for a fair, ambitious and binding deal have not changed in fact it is more urgently required than ever. The agreem
24、ent must ensure that global greenhouse gas emissions peak and start to decline before 2017, and that global average warming stays well below 2 C above pre-industrial levels, eventually returning to below 1.5 C in the long run. It also has to ensure and support adaptation measures to protect those ex
25、posed to the unavoidable impacts of climate change now and in the future. Meeting the 31 January deadline The Copenhagen Accord can help pave the way to delivering on these key criteria, if some of the good ideas included in the document were seriously strengthened by governments and incorporated in
26、to a legally binding deal under the UNFCCC. There are, for example, empty appendices to the Copenhagen Accord, where countries are invited to fill in their actions and targets to cut emissions. As a first step in re-establishing trust in the negotiations, WWF suggests that countries submit their mos
27、t ambitious figures for emissions reductions and mitigation actions by the 31 January deadline. The UNFCCC secretariat should further be empowered to do a technical review of the submitted targets and report on their compatibility with the 2 C limit enshrined in the Accord - in time for the next rou
28、nd of negotiations in the official working groups of the UN climate process that are scheduled to resume at the latest in Bonn this June. Such a review would inform further refinements aimed at ensuring that the targets put forward by countries match the necessary ambition levels indicated by scienc
29、e. The Copenhagen Accord also mandates several new actions and instruments, including a new fund for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries, a high level body informing the work on finance, as well as efforts to combat deforestation and enhance technology cooperation. Turning these ambiti
30、ons into real action should be a priority of governments and will also help to rebuild trust among negotiators in the continuing process of climate talks under the UNFCCC. Ensuring support for the most vulnerable One major concern among many least developed and most vulnerable countries is the insuf
31、ficient and disappointing language on adaptation and adaptation finance in the Accord. The fact that it mixes language on adaptation funding with language on response measures (i.e. support for countries like Saudi Arabia that demand funding to deal with economic impacts of reduced oil sales resulti
32、ng from global efforts to reduce emissions) is a particular problem in this context. Copenhagen Accord a stepping stone? 5 WWF suggests that developed countries clarify that climate finance in the Copenhagen Accord is meant to cover both mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, while guara
33、nteeing that funding is new and additional (i.e. on top of current aid). Moreover, countries should ensure that the language on response measures in the Accord doesnt prevent urgently needed adaptation finance from flowing to the most vulnerable countries such as the small island developing states a
34、nd the least developed countries. Strengthening the UN process Some politicians and commentators have chosen to focus blame for Copenhagens weak outcome on the UNFCCC process itself, citing the complexity of resolving such politically-charged yet technical issues through that inclusive forum. Howeve
35、r, those forums which are most often proposed as alternatives to the UN process, such as the G8 and G20 processes, the Greenland Dialogue, the Major Economies Forum (MEF), or bilateral meetings, have also seen an unprecedented number of meetings take up and fail to resolve the issue of climate chang
36、e at the level of Ministers or Heads of States. In WWFs view, the failing was not with the UNFCCC process, but with a lack of willingness to use the opportunities created by the negotiations to make real progress. Moving forward with the Copenhagen Accord hopefully starting a process of transparency
37、 about ambitions and real implementation that will break through some political deadlocks countries should focus on maximizing results from each of these negotiating forums, while investing a renewed authority to the UNFCCC to complete a fair, ambitious and binding deal. An Accord to overcome the di
38、scord Negotiations in the two official ad-hoc working groups of the UN talks on Long Term Cooperative Action (AWG LCA), and on the emission reduction targets for industrialized countries signed up to the Kyoto Protocol (AWG KP) produced draft texts in Copenhagen that will be carried forward as the b
39、asis for resumed negotiations in 2010. The current draft texts are still heavily bracketed, which indicates disagreement of parties with many of the proposals included. However, in most areas these drafts contain the options needed to create an effective agreement in the near future. The core text i
40、ntroduced by the chair of the AWG LCA in Copenhagen is also a good basis for negotiations this year, along with other texts on specific issue areas in the talks. These texts can be further informed by progress made through the Copenhagen Accord, to overcome the discord between parties that has deadl
41、ocked the UN talks for so long. Standing alone the Accord is far from what is needed, but it would become valuable if countries use it as an instrument to unlock a fuller and more ambitious agreement later in 2010 through negotiations under the UNFCCC. This will require leadership. Political leaders
42、 must assume full responsibility for the success of continued negotiations, giving their negotiators robust and innovative mandates to ensure that the difficult issues are solved and the stalemate ends. They must also commit to engaging sufficiently and prioritize completion of the work they failed
43、to finish in Copenhagen. Their job is not done yet. Copenhagen Accord a stepping stone? 6 The most important steps now In summary, key steps leading to a fair, ambitious and binding deal are: By 31 January, countries should submit ambitious targets and actions, and in doing so describe how these are
44、 compatible with a high probability of staying well below 2 C global warming above pre-industrial temperature levels. Parties should take immediate action to demonstrate seriousness about the Accords agreed outcome by making concrete progress towards operationalizing the funds and mechanisms and by
45、quickly implementing guidelines for international monitoring, reporting, and verification of mitigation actions and the promised financial and technology support. Mexico as the host of COP16 in December, the UNFCCC Secretariat and parties must urgently establish a work plan and a schedule for the UN
46、FCCC negotiating sessions in 2010. This will include establishing interim deadlines for agreeing on key issues such as the legal form(s) of the outcome. Other appropriate forums should be used to make progress that feeds into the UNFCCC process. 3. How do current pledges fare against the 2 C goal? A
47、t the heart of the Copenhagen Accord is the goal to keep global warming below 2 C compared to pre-industrial levels. In order to be in line with this goal, the targets and actions submitted by countries by 31 January should match the science, i.e. aim at what research says is needed to avoid crossin
48、g that temperature threshold. However, a serious reality check is in order. Actions and targets pledged by countries before and during Copenhagen dont add up to these necessary levels. Before and during Copenhagen, three influential studies were released which assess whether even the most ambitious
49、emission reduction targets put on the table by developed and developing countries are enough to avoid dangerous climate change. All three studies by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and UK economist Lord Stern1, by McKinsey for Project Catalyst2, and by Ecofys and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research3 give a common message: the world is not on a trajectory that would keep the increase in global temperature below 2 C. The finding was confirmed by an internal assessment by the UNFCCC Secretariat,
