Legal Options and Challenges
European Capacity Building Initiative
Policy Briefs and Notes
In a recent Concept Note,1 Benito Müller put forward the idea of a Southern Solidarity Fund (SSF) to receive voluntary contributions from developing countries for South-South climate change cooperation. It is meant to be established by the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC or Convention) with a developing country Board, and to be operated by the Green Climate Fund (GCF), as an operating entity of the FCCC financial mechanism. As such, it is meant to give developing countries ‘the opportunity to provide support to their peers for climate change activities’2 which ‘should be able to avail itself of the best available delivery systems, such as is hoped will be established under the Green Climate Fund, in particular through Enhanced Direct Access, where operational decision-making is devolved to recipient countries.’
Publication Date:
May, 2014
The Reformed Financial Mechanism II; Section III. Compliance Oversight
The Reformed Financial Mechanism II; Section III. Compliance Oversight
Part II The Question of Oversight, Post Copenhagen Synthesis Report
Publication Date:
June, 2009
Dissecting the Green Climate Fund
speaking notes
Publication Date:
July, 2011
The Berlin Mandate, adopted during the early hours of 7 April 1995, marked the end of the first Conference of Parties (COP 1) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Berlin, Germany.1 The Mandate was one of the most important decisions of the COP, paving the way for the negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol.2
As Chief Negotiator for Sweden, I participated actively in high-level informal consultations before the Berlin COP. During the COP, I chaired a high-level working group on the Berlin Mandate, which was established at the very beginning of the conference and worked all through, with meetings practically every day. My reflections in this paper seek to provide an insider’s view of the Berlin Mandate process, and draw lessons for the ongoing negotiations for a post-2020 climate regime.
Process and Substance
Publication Date:
May, 2014
Joint Submission to the Green Climate Fund Board
Publication Date:
April, 2016
Taxe sur le transport aerien de passagers en faveur de l'adaptation (IAPAL)
PROPOSITION DU GROUPE DES PAYS LES MOINS AVANCES (PMA) dans le cadre du Plan díACTION DE BALI Soumise ‡ la CCNUCC AWG-LCA le 12 dÈcembre 2008avec Treize Questions/rÈponses - Taxe sur le transport aerien de passagers en faveur de l'adaptation (IAPAL)
Publication Date:
July, 2009
ecbi Finance Circle meeting with Transitional Committee members
speaking notes
Publication Date:
April, 2011
In their Scenario Note on the sixth part of the second session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP), the ADP Co-chairs emphasized that “it is essential to use the October session to make significant progress in clarifying and advancing the content of the 2015 agreement, to build bridges and to work together on outstanding issues. In particular, it will be important in the October session, to further clarify and flesh out the operational aspects of the agreement. Key challenges that will need focussed attention in our work include: deepening the understanding on the longer-term cycle of contributions/commitments, including its periodicity (length) and the functions of the steps proposed, such as any periodical consideration or assessment and review”.
This ecbi/OCP Concept Note by Benito Müller, Xolisa J. Ngwadla (South Africa), Jose D. G. Miguez (Brazil) with Isabel Cavelier Adarve (Colombia), Carlos Fuller (Belize), Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu (DRC), and Nagmeldin G. Elhassan (Sudan) introduces the idea of a Dynamic Contribution Cycle as a contribution to the debate on these issues.
Sequencing Contributions in the 2015 Paris Agreement
Publication Date:
October, 2014
Review and Communication Cycles - Options Note
Publication Date:
October, 2016
