Paris Rules?

• Published in: Environmental policy and law Vol. 49; no. 1; pp. 11 - 19
• Main Authors: Verkuijl, Cleo, van Asselt, Harro
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London, England SAGE Publications 2019; Copyright Agency Limited (Distributor)
• Subjects: Accounting; Adaptation; Anthropogenic factors; Bones; Carbon; Climate action; Climate change; Climate effects; Climate system; Data collection; Developed countries; Developing countries; Emission inventories; Emission standards; Emissions; Environmental assessment; Finance; Flexibility; Greenhouse effect; Greenhouse gases; Hooks; Human influences; Human resources; Industrialized nations; Information processing; Kyoto Protocol; LDCs; Mitigation; Paris Agreement; Public finance; Reviews; Technology assessment; Transparency; United States > US; Norway
• DOI: 10.3233/EPL-190116
• ISSN: 0378-777X

While compliance with this guidance is not mandated for 2020, the decision also "strongly encourage[s]" Parties to include such information in any updates to their existing NDCs.5 Annex I to the decision contains a specific list of "Information to facilitate clarity, transparency and understanding of nationally determined contributions, referred to in decision 1/CP.21, paragraph 28", organised around the following NDC elements: * quantifiable information on the reference point (including, as appropriate, a base year); * timeframes and/or periods for implementation; * scope and coverage; * planning processes; * assumptions and methodological approaches, including those for estimating and accounting for anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and, as appropriate, removals; * how the Party considers that its NDC is fair and ambitious in the light of its national circumstances; and * how the NDC contributes towards achieving the objective of stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. [...]in-country reviews - the most labour-intensive form of review - are only used for a Party's first biennial transparency reports, at least twice every 10-year period, if recommended by a previous report, or if a Party requests such a review.27 Furthermore, the MPGs introduce a "simplified review" for greenhouse gas inventories submitted in a year in which a biennial transparency report is not due.28 It remains to be seen whether there will be sufficient financial and human resources to enable this framework to function in practice.29 Global Stocktake One of the key features of the Paris Agreement is the "ambition mechanism" that it introduces: a combination of periodic NDCs, enhanced transparency and, starting in 2023, a five-yearly "global stocktake" in which countries will assess collective progress made towards the Paris Agreement's long-term goals, and inform their next round of NDCs.30 Components of and Inputs into the Stocktake In Katowice, countries managed to put flesh on the bones of the stocktake by adopting a decision that addresses all three phases of this process: (1) information collection and preparation; (2) technical assessment; and (3) high-level consideration of outputs.31 Given the requirement that the stocktake work must focus on mitigation, adaptation, and means of implementation and support "in the light of equity and the best available science",32 the decision includes "[efforts to enhance understanding, action and support, on a cooperative and facilitative basis, related to averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change" among the sources of input for the stocktake.33 When viewed together with the transparency decision's hooks which enable countries to reflect loss and damage in their adaptation-related communications and in transparency reporting,34 this provision indicates that the PAWP further recognises the concerns of vulnerable countries that are already experiencing climate impacts to which adaptation is impossible. The PAWP recognises this by noting, The Committee shall pay particular attention to the respective national capabilities and circumstances of Parties, recognizing the special circumstances of least developed countries and small island developing states, at all stages of the process, in accordance with the provisions of the Paris Agreement, including in determining how to consult with the Party concerned, what assistance can be provided to the Party concerned to support its engagement with the Committee, and what measures are appropriate to facilitate implementation and promote compliance in each situation.45 Proceedings before the Compliance Committee can be triggered by a Party itself with respect to its own implementation or compliance.46 In addition, the Committee can initiate proceedings on its own motion, where it finds that a Party has not (1) communicated or maintained an NDC, (2) submitted a biennial transparency report, (3) participated in the facilitative, multilateral consideration of progress under the transparency framework, or (4) reported ex-ante information on climate finance.47 The Committee will thus provide an opportunity to review Parties' work under mandatory provisions that would not be covered by the technical expert review of the transparency framework. Parties agreed to start discussions on a new long-term finance goal (up from US$100 billion) in 2020.61 Just before the COP, the UNFCCC's Standing Committee on Finance released its 2018 Biennial Assessment and Overview of Climate Finance Flows,62 which suggests that public finance - including flows from developed to developing countries, as well as among developing countries themselves - amounted to over US$70 billion in 2016.63 While this shows some progress towards the goal, controversy remained regarding the manner in which it was derived - specifically, how mobilised private finance should be reflected in such reports.64 The conference came to one conclusion that acceded to a key demand of developing country Parties - that the Kyoto Adaptation Fund will serve the Paris Agreement, thus securing a future for that fund beyond the Kyoto Protocol.65 As a consequence, once the share of proceeds from the SDM under Article 6(4) becomes available, the Adaptation Fund will cease to be considered a component of the Kyoto Protocol.66 COP-24 witnessed a host of new climate finance pledges.