Thank you!

Mapping objectives with NAMAs[modified for online publication]

Mathias Friman and Björn-Ola LinnérLinköping University

Negoti

ator

Govern

mental

Envrio

nmen

tal N

GO

Resea

rcher

Other N

GO

UN or IG

O

Bussin

ess

Indige

nous

System

Media

Multipl

e role

sLo

cal

050

100150200250300350400450

Primary role at the UNFCCC Conferences

Support providers head offices (dark grey) A2 countries (light grey)

Developing country mitigation

Transfer of finance

Transfer of technology

R&D in developing countries

Nationally defined SD goals

Internationally defined development goals

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

NAMA objectives: All delegates

Disagree strongly Disagree Disagree slightly Neither disagree nor agree Agree slightly Agree Agree strongly

Developing country mitigation

Transfer of finance

Transfer of technology

R&D in developing countries

Nationally defined SD goals

Internationally defined development goals

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

NAMA objectives: Mean values for A1 and NA1 negotiators

Annex 1

Non-Annex1

Develo

ping c

ountr

y mitig

ation

Transfe

r of fi

nanc

e

Transfe

r of te

chno

logy

R&D in de

velop

ing co

untrie

s

Nation

ally d

efine

d SD go

als

Intern

ation

ally d

efine

d dev

elopm

ent g

oals

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

All NAMA objectives: Agree strongly fraction(A1 and NA1 Negotiators)

NA1A1

Disagree strongly

Disagree

Disagree slightly

Neither disagree nor agreeAgree slightly

Agree

Agree strongly

0%

50%

100%

Transfer of finance objective: A1 and NA1 Negotiators

Annex 1 Non-Annex1

Disagree strongly

Disagree

Disagree slightly

Neither disagree nor agreeAgree slightly

Agree

Agree strongly

0%

50%

Transfer of technology objective: A1 and NA1 Negotiators

Annex 1 Non-Annex1

Disagree strongly

Disagree

Disagree slightly

Neither disagree nor agreeAgree slightly

Agree

Agree strongly

0%

20%

40%

R&D in developing countries objective: A1 and NA1 Negotiators

A1NA1

Develop

ing cou

ntry m

itigati

on

Transfe

r of fi

nance

Transfe

r of te

chnolo

gy

R&D in de

velopin

g cou

ntries

Nationall

y defi

ned S

D goals

Internatio

nally

defined

deve

lopment go

als0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

All NAMA objectives: Agree and agree strongly fraction(A1 and NA1 Negotiators, and Support providers)

NA1 A1

Support providers

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

All NAMA Objectives: A1 and NA1 Negotiators and NGOs(Fraction: Agree Strongly)

Annex 1 Negotiator Agree strongly Non-Annex1 Negotiator Agree stronglyAnnex 1 NGO Agree strongly Non-Annex1 NGO Agree strongly

Implications for 2015 consensus

• identify convergence and divergence between Annex 1 and non-Annex 1

• Broad convergence on the importance of developing country mitigation

• Greater divergence on other objectives for NAMAs• In general large expressed support for all non-mitigation

goals.• In particular transfer of finance, but also the other goals,

display a clear divergence in level of priority.

Implications for implementation

• Greatest difference between non-Annex 1 and support providers in:

– Developing country mitigation– Transfer of technology– R&D

• Convergence between non-Annex 1 and support providers on nationally defined sustainable development goals.

• Implications for bi-lateral support. • The wide divergence on prioritized objectives is a challenge

for multilateral support institutions, e.g. Green Climate Fund.

Thank you!

Thank You!