Coming of Age? UN climate negotiations and the Paris COP21 ...bcc.ncc-cma.net › upload ›...

Coming of Age? UN climate negotiations and the Paris COP21 Climate Agreement

Michael GrubbProfessor of Energy and Climate Change

University College London

International Seminar on Climate System and Climate Change (ISCS) Nanjing University,

July 2018

1. How do negotiations work?2. Origins and early history of the climate change regime: first 15 years 3. Copenhagen (2009) and the Paris negotiations 4. The Paris (2015) outcome in detail5. Did we save the world in Paris?

International regimes: basics

• What is a regime in international relations?– Set of rules, institutions and procedures that

Ø Guides international action on a given issue, and isØ Centred on a legal treaty, which can be supplemented by additional treaties.

• Compromise between – (1) international authority (doesn’t exist), and – (2) free-for-all or bilateral agreements.

• Many regimes established since the late 1980s to address (global) environmental problems.

• Aim to reach binding agreement (Treaty) that engages all the countries involved (the ‘Parties’) under terms of UN Vienna Law of Treaties: – a Convention is typically a broad, foundational form of Treaty, which – may be followed by subsequent daughter Treaties (often called Protocols)

• Treaty negotiations typically take several years to reach common understanding of the issue, and move from draft texts to a final document– ‘adopted’ by consensus at culmination conference– National administrations then ‘sign’ to confirm their agreement– Then take the agreement to national legislatures to ‘ratify’

• A Treaty only is binding (‘enters into force’) when threshold number have ratified

• Paradox of international law: Treaties have limited formal enforcement but high adherence

International Negotiations: Basics





July 2018


UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992)

Principles• Equity, developed country leadership, Common but differentiated responsibilities

and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC), precaution, right to sustainable developmentCategorisation of countries

• Divided Parties into two main categories, Annex I and non-Annex I. Also recognises special circumstances of Least-Developed Countries and Economies in Transition

Mitigation commitments

• All Parties with general commitments, Annex I with specific goal to jointly return emissions to 1990 levels by 2000Reporting commitments

• All Parties to submit emissions data (Annex I Parties annually) and national reports (more frequently for Annex I Parties)Financial commitments

• Annex II Parties (sub-set of Annex I) to provide financial assistance to developing countriesInstitutions

• To implement the treaty & continue negotiations (annual Conferences of Parties – COPs)Review clause

• Review of the “adequacy” of commitments at COP 1 led to…

Foundational treaty UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), adopted & widely signed during 1992, ratified by most countries shortly after (now 193), entered into force 1994, commits to • Overarching Objective (Article

2): “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system …”

• Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR): Industrialised countries (Annex I) v others, with financial commitments (OECD) for Annex II

• Annual Conference of the Parties (COP) to further action until the Objective is met, requirements to review etc.

… the 1997 Kyoto Protocol• Adopted 1997 to implement Annex I leadership – rolling commitment periods define binding

emission targets with flexibilities • Legally-binding emission targets for Annex I Parties only

– Common baseline (1990) and First Commitment Period (2008-2012)– Common coverage: 6 gases, & land-use change and forestry– Common rules and methodologies– Differentiated targets: -8% to +10% from 1990 levels– Leading to an overall reduction of their collective emissions “at least” 5% below 1990

• Strong reporting provisions & compliance mechanism• full panoply of legal architecture to support Market instruments: emissions trading, joint

implementation, Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)• Non-Annex I Parties engaged through the CDM• Entered into force 16 February 2005, without the USA (George W. Bush administration announced

in 2001 it had “no interest” in the KP). Canada withdrew in 2012.*• Second commitment period adopted in 2012 (“The Doha Amendment”). Technically, KP is still in

force, but Japan, Russian Federation and others said they would not join the Doha Amendment.

* All those remaining complied: see Shishlov (2015) and Grubb (2015) (editorial), Climate Policy 16:6

Figure 7‑ 9 Evolution of the International Carbon MarketSource: State of the Carbon Market, World Bank Chapter 7

Under the Kyoto Protocol, EU ETS – a core European instrument to implement its commitment - was main driver stimulating huge growth of CDM and related emission reduction credits

Figure 7‑ 10 Project volumes – from validation to issuance of Certified Emission ReductionsSource: Based on data from UNEP Risoe CDM/JI Pipeline Analysis and Database, July 1st 2012 Chapter 7

The CDM debate: “Be careful what you ask for … you might get it”

Achievements of climate change regime, first 15 yearsRaised awareness & embedded processes, nationally and

internationallyPromoted learning, leading to greater focus on issues such as

adaptation & forestryBoosted funding for developing countries, and promoted technology

transferDeveloped rigorous methodologies to report and review emissions

data

Policy innovation in the field of market mechanisms

Built capacity in developing countries to respond to climate changePrompted policy change throughout the world, especially in Kyoto

Protocol Parties (eg creation of climate ministries/departments, climate laws)

Emission targets of those countries that remained Parties to the Kyoto Protocol were all met

Thousands of emission-reducing projects have been registered under the CDM, paving the way for developing countries to take on

emission commitments





July 2018


• Complete collapse of the official UN process (as visible before …): – Fundamental North-South schism over Kyoto – Obama + BASIC (‘Group of 5’) craft Copenhagen Accord with limited

outreach to others– UN Secretary-General Ban-ki-Moon rescues a measure of COP ‘noting’ the

Copenhagen Accord

• Judgements:– (EU) “Diplomatic disasters don’t come much bigger than this”– (India) great success – finance, preserved non-legally binding process, etc– (US Administration) considerable success – Obama saved the day, outcome

has most of the key elements necessary– China took most of the blame …..

• Uncertain nature of Copenhagen Accord in relation to UN

From Kyoto Protocol to where? 2009: Copenhagen COP15 / (Kyoto MOP5)

Humanity’s “last chance” !?

• Endorses continuation of twin-track negotiations (Kyoto + global)• ‘Recognising the scientific view .(..) below 2ºC (..) To meet objectives consistent

with science and on the basis of equity (..) Cooperate in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions’

• Adaptation, Forestry• Annex I - Emission commitments to be tabled with reductions, and finance, subject

to MRV• Non-Annex I - Parties mitigation actions to be tabled; biannual reporting; ‘provision

for international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines that will ensure that national sovereignty is respected (..)‘ supported measures subject to international MRV’

• Finance: “collective commitment by developed countries .. Approaching US$30bn for 2010-12 … goal of mobilising jointly US$100bn/yr by 2020

• “A significant portion to flow through Copenhagen Green Fund” .. As an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention

• Assessment of implementation of this Accord by 2015 in light of Convention’s Ultimate Objective

… “The most successful failure in UN history”?

Copenhagen Accord - content

The road to the Paris Agreement

• Paris 2015, the culmination of a 6-year reconstruction programme following the collapse of Copenhagen talks in 2009

• Agenda 2010-12 (of ‘Cancun to Doha’) essentially to restore legitimacy & credibility of the global process and establish agenda & timeline

• Subsequent COPs largely updating the UNFCCC “common but differentiated” principle and fostering political conditions and institutional context for renewed ambition

“ If ambition is ‘broad and deep’, COP21 marks swap from ‘deep’ (but narrow) to ‘broad’ (but shallow)”

The renewed context

• Emission realities: – Global emissions rising, but more slowly – towards peaking?– Emissions stable or falling in much of developed world – incl. US,

EU (but not all) – China’s emissions double those of US (but per capita still half)– Developing country emissions 60% global total– Window of opportunity to reach two degrees closing

• Economic & geopolitical realities – After financial crisis and rise of China especially, no longer same

economic dominance of industrialised countries– High oil prices renewed fears of overdependence on fossil fuels– Renewable energy costs sharply declining

The mission

Official mandate for Paris agreed in Durban 2011 at COP 17. • “develop a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed

outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all Parties”

• “…raise the level of ambition”; “…close the ambition gap”; “ensuring the highest possible mitigation efforts by all Parties”

Reading “between the lines…”• Get the US back in, preferably before Obama leaves office• Stronger commitments for emerging economies, read “China”• Raise the overall global ambition to keep a two deg.C within reach• Much stronger action on impacts and adaptation• Avoid “another Copenhagen”

The politics

A “ripe” historical moment:• Political timing favourable in both the US and China (Obama

effect, China’s five year plan cycle, US/China deals)• Recent changes of government in longstanding laggards: Australia,

Canada, Argentina, India• Upsurge in renewables, falling prices (esp solar)• El Nino arrives just in time to remind the world that the global

warming ‘pause’ was largely fantasy – series of hottest years in human history

• Adoption of UN Sustainable Development Goals + deal in ozone negotiations on HFCs

• Skilful team and preparations• Paris terrorist attacks: COP 21 as “an act of defiance” (Obama)

The Paris COP: event of the decade?

17

§ Largest number of participants in UN history- 30,372 total: 19,208 governments, 6306 NGOs, 2798 media - (Copenhagen had 27,294 participants)

§ Largest COP site- ~1 km2

§ Largest number of heads of state under one roof on a single day (30 Nov.) in world history- 150

§ … And Entered into Force with unprecedented speed after US ratification through Executive order





July 2018


(1) A strong global emissions goal:

• Hold temperature increase “well below” 2 degrees and “pursue efforts” to limit to 1.5 degrees (big surprise!)*

• “reach global peaking … as soon as possible” • “…balance … emissions and removals … in the second half

of this Century” (net zero)

* Declared aims (Specific interpretation of UNFCCC Objective on “Dangerous Interference):

(a) “Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels”

(2) Adaptation and supporting mechanisms

Supporting mechanisms:• “Finance: $100bn per year by 2020, up to 2025.• “loss and damage”: separate article• Market mechanisms • Transparency framework: Reporting and review, especially

for …

(b) “Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production; (c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development. “

(3) “Wide but (often) weak” national mitigation goals*• Country pledges: (Intended) Nationally Determined Contributions (I)NDCs• Universal (194 countries), but not legally binding• Same type of commitments for all, although expectation of leadership on

developed countries remains.• Most targets for 2030 or 2025, but different types of targets, baselines, and

coverage (eg forests)• Industrialized countries should have absolute targets (Article. 4.4)

… with stocktaking and review• To be updated every five years – no backsliding! (Art. 4.3, 4.9)• Developing countries should “move over time” towards “economy-wide

reduction or limitation targets (Art. 4.4)

* “.. including the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances “ (CBDR-RC-DNC)”

Terminology of developed and developing countries, but no reference to Annex I or non-Annex I

• Analysis of INDC pledges ranges from between 2.7 to 3.5 °C• Strong uncertainty of pathways beyond 2030; can measures ‘divert’ pathway?

22

As a scientific deal – too little, too late?

NDCs account for c. one third to one half of reductions needed to move world onto a pathway towards two degrees

Figure 27. Analysis of INDC pledges by PBL (Source: http://www.indcforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Michel-den-Elzen_UNEP-gap_website.pdf)

• Long term goals with 5-year

review and global stocktakes

• Adaptation elevated to equal

prominence, recognition of

‘loss and damage’ • Universal MRV

provisions• Finance of at least $100bn/yr

extended to 2025, to rise thereafter

• Recognises core need to build

capacity• Entered info force

4th Nov 2016

• Acknowledge-ment current NDCs insufficient

• Embodies recognition and encouragement of numerous coalitions and ‘clubs’

• Climate change as a social endeavour involving trans-national alliances and ultimately engaging all actors in society

• The new dynamic from Paris is as important as the content

Wide span of the Paris Agreement

A political and diplomatic triumph

• Brought the US “back in” & engaged China, India and other large emerging emitters

• Broke down the Annex I / non-Annex I “firewall”• Changed the “storyline”:

– No longer north vs south, but “The willing versus the unwilling”

– Climate change mitigation an opportunity, not (just) a burden– Not (just) governments, also stakeholders– A much richer picture of climate change as part of human

development – a more “people centric” regime





July 2018


“Saved the world?”“a huge flame of hope” UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres

“A major leap for mankind [sic]” Francois Hollande

“a monumental triumph for people and our planet”UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon

“The best chance we have of saving the one planet we’ve got” Barack Obama

The BUTs ..

“The deal alone won’t dig us out of the hole that we’re in, but it makes the sides less steep.” Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director, Greenpeace

Ultimate significance of Paris COP21- four fundamental changes

• 23 years after the UNFCCC, a specific formal interpretation of ‘avoiding dangerous interference’– And it is a highly ambitious one, on mitigation, adaptation and finance

• The Firewall is Dead – we are all in this together– Extensive but nuanced recognitions of differentiation, but no reference in COP21 texts to

the legal division of Annex I / non-Annex I– The other elements: universal NDCs with differential expectations, finance, elevation of

adaptation, loss & damage, forestry etc are all manifestations of a new global balance with higher relevance of developing country concerns

• An evolutionary solution – In time, and space – and potentially, in legal form

• A global social endeavour (COP Decision, sections IV and V)– not a UN-driven solution relying purely on nation-state implementation– rewriting international governance and indeed the assumptions underpinning it– rooted in transparency, multi-level solutions, private sector and social pressures

A fundamental updating of the UNFCCC framework for the 21st Century.

See also Special Issue of the Climate Policy journal www.climatepolicy.com

UNFCCC / Paris Agreement a necessary condition for the things that matter, but (much less than) half the story

• Paris also displayed a huge diversity of other activities across numerous diverse sectors of society – Actively encouraged more than ever before

• UNFCCC cannot be the forum for serious implementation efforts– But should be the court of Common Accounting and evaluation

• It has a duty to encourage ‘joint efforts’ – plurilateral arrangements (as with trade regime) to further implementation and ambition– Eg. ‘Cooperative arrangements’ (Clubs, in economic speak)

The wider significance of Paris COP21 resides in four fundamental changes

• Twenty-three years after the UNFCCC, we have a specific interpretation of ‘avoiding dangerous interference’ in formal UN Agreement– And it is a highly ambitious one, on mitigation, adaptation and finance

• The Firewall is Dead – we are all in this together– Extensive but nuanced recognitions of differentiation, but no reference in COP21 texts to Annex I / non-Annex I– The other elements: universal NDCs with differential expectations, finance, elevation of adaptation, loss & damage,

forestry etc are all manifestations of a new global balance with higher relevance of developing country concerns• This is an evolutionary solution

– In time, and space – and potentially, in legal form • This is global social endeavour (COP Decision, sections IV and V)

– not a UN-driven solution relying purely on nation-state implementation– a revolution in international governance and indeed the assumptions underpinning it– rooted in transparency, multi-level solutions, private sector and social pressures

A fundamental updating of the UNFCCC framework for the 21st Century

So … Half empty

or Half full?

“History will judge us not by what we did today, but by what we do from this day forward”

-Representative of Maldives for Small Island States

“What was once unthinkable, has now become unstoppable”

-Ban Ki Moon, UN Secretary-General

Closing Statements, Paris 12 December 2015

UNFCCC / Paris Agreement a necessary condition for the things that matter, but (much less than) half the story• Paris also displayed a huge diversity of other activities across numerous diverse

sectors of society – Actively encouraged more than ever before

• UNFCCC cannot be the forum for serious implementation efforts– But should be the court of Common Accounting, evaluation, guidance and

strengthening • It has a duty to encourage ‘joint efforts’ – plurilateral arrangements (as with trade

regime) to further implementation and ambition– Eg. ‘Cooperative arrangements’ between willing countries (Clubs, in economic

speak)• The 2018 review in itself could provide pressure – or pretext – for strengthening NDCs,

unlikely to be universal





July 2018


Breadth and Depth of national systems

International coveragePurpose of carbon pricing clubs – to help jurisdictions navigate a difficult journey

Coming of Age? UN climate negotiations and the Paris COP21 ...bcc.ncc-cma.net › upload ›...

Documents

Transcript of Coming of Age? UN climate negotiations and the Paris COP21 ...bcc.ncc-cma.net › upload ›...