At the 2019 Climate Change Conference in Madrid, Spain, crunch issues – an unambiguous call for much higher climate ambition to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, finance for the loss and damage caused by climate impacts, a fail-safe market mechanism that does not compromise environmental integrity, and credible financial contributions to enable action in developing countries – proved too difficult to resolve within the high-pressure, time-deficient confines of a COP, despite a two-day extension and the resilience and staying power of seasoned diplomats.
European Capacity Building Initiative
Policy Briefs and Notes
The governance arrangements for the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage and its Executive Committee have been contested since the conclusion of negotiations on Article 8 of the Paris Agreement. Which supreme body – the Conference of the Parties (COP), the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA), or both – is / are responsible for guiding their work? This brief addresses legal and practical aspects of the governance debate.
What's holding up the Article 6 negotiations? Can differences be resolved at the 25th Conference of Parties (COP25) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change? This policy paper explains the crunch issues in Article 6 negotiations in generally accessible language. It sheds light on the key differences between negotiating Parties on the eve of COP25 in Madrid. Understanding the issues and Party positions is a key step to identify solutions in these highly political and technically complex negotiations.
A brief introduction to climate finance
Conventional “CO2-equivalent” emissions calculated using 100-year “Global Warming Potentials” do not consistently reflect the impact of emissions on global temperature: they overstate the impact of constant emissions of any short-lived climate pollutant such as methane by a factor of about four, while understating the large impact of changes in methane emission rates. Myles Allen and Michelle Cain from the University of Oxford explain how CO2-e emissions can nevertheless be used to calculate “warming-equivalent” emissions to inform burden-sharing discussions, mitigation policies in crucial sectors such as agriculture, and stocktakes of progress towards a global temperature goal.
This flyer highlights the importance of bringing together all countries on the same page with a common NDC time frame, to enhance ambition and at the same time enable more equitable global outcomes.
The 24th Conference of Parties (COP24) to the UNFCCC was an important milestone for the international climate change regime, expected to further animate the Paris Agreement by adopting the detailed rules for its implementation. Did the compromises that had to be made to accommodate the varied interests of 197 countries in Katowice add up to an adequate response to climate change? A succinct summary of key outcomes, with comments and quotes from the ecbi network of negotiators.
The Dynamic Contribution Cycle, designed during the 2014 ecbi Oxford Seminar to maximise space for future ambition in the Paris Agreement, revisited in light of recent developments and submissions to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The IPCC’s special report on Global Warming of 1.5°C recently highlighted the importance of early action against climate change. In this context, pre-2020 ambition becomes ever more critical. As the 2020 deadline approaches, this policy brief considers whether pre-2020 pledges on mitigation and climate finance have been met. It also provides an overview of the history of the pre-2020 negotiations; plans for upcoming sessions; key issues under discussion; and a set of key questions and recommendations for climate negotiators.
The 2015 Paris Agreement was negotiated piece by piece, rather than as a whole document. As a result, although several pieces of the Agreement are closely related and even overlap, not all the linkages between them are logical or, at least as yet, coherent. Identifying and addressing the links between these different complex elements is essential for the overall coherence and effectiveness of the Paris outcome. This paper identifies links and gaps between the major elements of the Agreement.