Cancun Meet Ends with Many Gains
Well
into the second week of talks, there were signs ministers were making progress
on key areas. After some last-minute hiccoughs and all-night talks, governments
finally reached an accord in the wee hours of 11 December - in no small
measure, many delegates said, due to skilful chairing by COP President Patricia
Espinosa, Mexico’s foreign minister.
There are two texts that make up the
Cancun Agreements: one on Long Term Cooperative Action (LCA) and one on the
Kyoto Protocol. Much compromise can be seen in the texts with give and take by
both developed and developing countries. For example, the Green Climate Fund -
which was established last year in Copenhagen - was strengthened and the World
Bank was given a three-year interim mandate to serve as trustee.
The
United Nations climate summit that finished in Cancun this month surpassed low
expectations when governments struck a deal that keeps alive efforts for a
multilateral response to tackle climate change.
The
agreements reached in the Mexican beach resort do not establish caps on
green-house gas emissions; on that crucial issue, they simply kick the can down
the road to next year’s summit in Durban, South Africa. But govern-ments agreed on an international system for monitoring
mitigation, fleshed out a facility for climate finance, and established rules
for rewarding forest preservation. They also steered clear of a clash that
could have killed what remains of the Kyoto Protocol. Trade issues, from
emissions resulting from the international shipment of goods to the use of
unilateral trade measures ostensibly to offset reduced industrial
competitiveness resulting from higher carbon costs, proved too contentious, and
were left out of the text.
Additionally,
any references to the use of unilateral trade measures were removed, leaving a
crucial element of enforcement and regulation unresolved. Clearly, trade issues
proved to be some of the most difficult questions to untangle and agree upon in
Cancun.
This
concession was balanced by an agreement that the Fund would be designed by a
transitional committee made up of a majority of developing countries. The 40
member committee will be made up of 15 developed countries and 25 developing
countries (seven from Africa, seven from Asia, seven from the Group of Latin
America and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC), two from small island developing
states (SIDS), and two least-developed countries).
Another
major compromise - particularly for China - can be seen in the establishment of
an international system for providing measuring, reporting, and verification
(MRV) for mitigation actions. This “transparency” issue had seemed too
difficult to solve in the weeks leading up to Cancun, with the US insisting
that it be a part of any financing package and China resolutely against
anything of the sort.
On
mitigation in general, parties agreed that by the time next year’s Durban COP
arrives, they would establish a timeframe for emissions to reach a global
“peak.” China has been resistant to committing to a peak in the past, arguing
until quite recently that it expects its emissions to continue to rise for some
time.
The Kyoto Protocol lives to see
another day. Although debilitated, it is not dead, as many thought might
happen. Several developed countries - including Canada, Australia, and Japan -
had been calling for an end to Kyoto, arguing that any climate deal that does
not require major economies like China and India to meet mitigation targets is
ineffective.
Cancun
secures the survival of Kyoto’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) programme and opens up the possibility for its expansion.
The deal, however, does not establish a second term of emissions reduction
commitments for Kyoto and it still is unclear what will happen when the first
phase expires at the end of 2012.
Another
key victory for developing countries is that, as laid out in the Kyoto
Protocol, they will continue to not be penalised for
failing to meet their emissions targets. In the end, China also managed to
include language that allows it to set its reduction target based on “emissions
intensity” - a less arduous target based on carbon emissions per unit of
economic output. Developed countries had been pushing for commitments capping
total emissions.
The
agreement also establishes rules on the enhanced Reducing Emissions from Defore-station and Forest Degradation in Developing
Countries (REDD+) programme, a key issue pushed by
Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
Notably,
the rules on REDD+ now mention the need to respect the rights of indigenous
communities and others, in accordance with international law. Some developing
countries, most notably Bolivia, had expressed reservations that an
international forests agreement might impinge on the traditional practices of forest
dwellers.
Small
Island Developing States (SIDS), the countries most
vulnerable to rising sea levels resulting from climate change, received a small
victory with language that “recognises the need to
consider” strengthening the long-term goal of capping global average
temperature rises by lowering this goal from 2°C to 1.5°C.
While the Cancun meeting surpassed
what had been expected of it at the outset, several key issues were dropped in
order to reach consensus - trade-related issues among them. Agriculture, which
had been considered one of the easier negotiating issues, became linked in the negotia-ting process to contentious discussions about
emissions resulting from international shipping. When it became clear that
parties would be unable to overcome their differences on how to manage bunker
fuels - the global nature of the industry makes it difficult to make decisions
on jurisdiction - both issues were snipped out of the
text.
Additionally,
any references to the use of unilateral trade measures were removed, leaving
the issue unresolved. It remains to be seen how governments will try to address
these thorny issues when the UNFCCC process resumes in 2011.