O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.
Transparency of Mitigation:
Possible outline of modalities, procedures and guidelines
Neha Pahuja
The Energy and Resources...
Purpose and linkages (Art 13.5
and 13.6)
 To provide clear
understanding of climate
action
 Tracking of progress on
NDCs...
Avenues for Flexibility
Reporting
 Scope and level of details in reporting
 Frequency of reporting
Review
 Format of re...
Same as existing:
GHG Inventory, BR and
NATCOM for
developed countries
BUR and NATCOM for
developing countries
Options for...
Same as existing:
GHG Inventory, BR and
NATCOM for
developed countries
BUR and NATCOM for
developing countries
Options for...
Same as existing plus
NDC:
GHG Inventory, BR and
NATCOM for developed
countries; BUR and
NATCOM for developing
countries
P...
Same as existing plus
NDC:
GHG Inventory, BR and
NATCOM for developed
countries; BUR and
NATCOM for developing
countries
P...
Flexibility in reporting
form and frequency on
pre-determined criteria.
Eg. Different for LDCs
and SIDCs Vs others.
Option...
Summary of Possible Options
Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
1...
Key Messages
 Different capacities and national circumstances
 Lack of domestic infrastructure and technical capacity to...
Thanks
neha.pahuja@teri.res.in
Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
Existing MRV Under UNFCCC
Differentiated Reporting and Review
 Annual Inventory
 NATCOM every 4 years
 Biennial Reports...
Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
 Differences in reporting an...
What to report in the context of NDCs?
Information:
 Base year (Reference)
 Target year
 Target, including
coverage and...
How to review in the context of NDCs?
 Facilitative mutual
consideration of
progress on
individual NDCs
 Inputs to globa...
11:30 – 13:00 Breakout Group 5: Transparency of mitigation – providing flexibility in the enhanced transparency
framework ...
Próximos SlideShares
Carregando em…5
×

Transparency of Mitigation: Possible outline of modalities, procedures and guidelines, Neha Pahuja CCXG GF September 2016 Breakout 5

165 visualizações

Publicada em

Transparency of Mitigation: Possible outline of modalities, procedures and guidelines by Neha Pahuja CCXG GF September 2016 Breakout 5

Publicada em: Meio ambiente
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

Transparency of Mitigation: Possible outline of modalities, procedures and guidelines, Neha Pahuja CCXG GF September 2016 Breakout 5

  1. 1. Transparency of Mitigation: Possible outline of modalities, procedures and guidelines Neha Pahuja The Energy and Resources Institute, India Contact: neha.pahuja@teri.res.in Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change 14 September 2016
  2. 2. Purpose and linkages (Art 13.5 and 13.6)  To provide clear understanding of climate action  Tracking of progress on NDCs under Art.4 and adaptation under Art 7  Inform global stocktake under Art14  Support provided and received in the context of climate actions Modalities and guidelines  Facilitative, non-intrusive, non-punitive, respectful of national sovereignty and avoid placing undue burden on Parties (Art. 13.3)  Build on existing experience from NATCOMS, BRs, BURS, IARs, ICAs (Art. 13.4)  To be developed through first COP/MOP of PA Flexibility (Art 13.2 )  Shall provide flexibility in the implementation of the provisions…. In light of their capacities  Modalities to reflect such flexibility  Review process to give attention to respective national capabilities and circumstances  Review process to provide assistance in identifying capacity building needs Article 13.1 : “In order to build mutual trust and confidence and to promote effective implementation, an enhanced transparency framework for action and support, with built-in flexibility which takes into account Parties’ different capacities and builds upon collective experience is hereby established.” Enhanced Transparency Framework in Paris Agreement (PA) COP Serving as MoP to the PA at its first session to adopt modalities, procedures and guidelines Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
  3. 3. Avenues for Flexibility Reporting  Scope and level of details in reporting  Frequency of reporting Review  Format of review (in-country, centralised, desk)  Scope and level of detail of review  Frequency of review Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
  4. 4. Same as existing: GHG Inventory, BR and NATCOM for developed countries BUR and NATCOM for developing countries Options for Flexibility Under PA Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Same as exiting: ERTs, IAR, MA, In- country Review for developed countries ICA,FSV for developing countries 1 Option 1: Carry forward of existing elements  Why it is the best option? ‒ Being practiced currently, considers differences in capacities and capabilities of Parties ‒ Collective and individual past experience exists  Why it is not the best option? ‒ What is enhanced in this option ‒ How does it link with NDCs and its progress
  5. 5. Same as existing: GHG Inventory, BR and NATCOM for developed countries BUR and NATCOM for developing countries Options for Flexibility Under PA Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Same as exiting: ERTs, IAR, MA, In- country Review for developed countries ICA,FSV for developing countries 2 Option 2: Carry forward, step up and gradually converge  Why it is the best option? ‒ Considers differences in capacities and capabilities of Parties ‒ Allows for gradual building of capacities and convergence of all Parties ‒ Collective and individual past experience exists ‒ Ensures flexibility on when to step-up and how much  Why it is not the best option? ‒ How does it link with NDCs and its progress ‒ Uncertainty in estimates
  6. 6. Same as existing plus NDC: GHG Inventory, BR and NATCOM for developed countries; BUR and NATCOM for developing countries Plus progress metrics on NDCs Options for Flexibility Under PA Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Same as exiting: ERTs, IAR, MA, In- country Review for developed countries ICA,FSV for developing countries 3 Option 3: Bottom-up determination of flexibility (plus NDC)  Why it is the best option? ‒ Links with the NDCs and its progress ‒ Considers differences in capacities and capabilities of Parties and allows for Parties to assess their own capacities ‒ There is past experience with can be used  Why it is not the best option? ‒ Uncertainty in estimates ‒ There is limited importance of capacity- building and enhancing capacities
  7. 7. Same as existing plus NDC: GHG Inventory, BR and NATCOM for developed countries; BUR and NATCOM for developing countries Plus progress metrics on NDCs Options for Flexibility Under PA Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Same as exiting: ERTs, IAR, MA, In- country Review for developed countries; ICA,FSV for developing countries; gradually converging 4 Option 4: Bottom-up determination of flexibility (plus NDC) and converging review  Why it is the best option? ‒ Links with the NDCs and its progress ‒ Considers differences in capacities and capabilities of Parties and allows for Parties to assess their own capacities ‒ There is past experience with can be used  Why it is not the best option? ‒ Reduced uncertainty in estimates
  8. 8. Flexibility in reporting form and frequency on pre-determined criteria. Eg. Different for LDCs and SIDCs Vs others. Options for Flexibility Under PA Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Converging review for all 5 Option 5: Pre-determined flexibility and convergence  Why it is the best option? ‒ Links with the NDCs and its progress ‒ Considers differences in capacities and capabilities of Parties and allows for Parties to assess their own capacities ‒ There is past experience with can be used  Why it is not the best option? ‒ Reduced uncertainty in estimates ‒ What pre-determination criteria to use?
  9. 9. Summary of Possible Options Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 1 Carry forward Same as existing Same as existing 2 Carry forward, Step-up and convergence Same & converging Same & converging 3 Bottom up determination of flexibility Same + NDC progress metrics Same as existing 4 Bottom up determination of flexibility and converging Same + NDC progress metrics Same & converging 5 Predetermined flexibility, convergence in reporting Different groups Converging
  10. 10. Key Messages  Different capacities and national circumstances  Lack of domestic infrastructure and technical capacity to MRV  Capacity building on MRV is the key to enhanced transparency  Flexibility needed and to be in-built to bridge the capacity gap  Various ways in which flexibility can be in-built  Can be introduced into scope, form, frequency and level of detail of reporting and scope, frequency and form of review Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
  11. 11. Thanks neha.pahuja@teri.res.in Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
  12. 12. Existing MRV Under UNFCCC Differentiated Reporting and Review  Annual Inventory  NATCOM every 4 years  Biennial Reports (BRs) every 2 years  International Assessment and Reviews (IARs)  Expert Review Team (ERT)  Multilateral Assessment (MA)  National Communications (NATCOM)  Biennial Update Report (BURs)  International Consultation and Analysis (ICA)  Facilitative Sharing of Views (FSVs)  Technical Team of Experts (TTE)  Reporting: − Form: Differences in format; IPCC 2006 mandatory for AI; More similarities in content than diff − Frequency: 2 year for BUR and BRs. 4 year for NATCOM and 1 year for inventory for AI  Review: − Form: In-Country, Desk, Centralised by ERT from roster of experts for developed country and centralised for BURs. − Frequency: Ranging from Nil to 2 and 4 years − Objective: Improved transparency for NAI; Improved transparency and Comparability for AI Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Developed Countries Developing Countries Differentiation
  13. 13. Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016  Differences in reporting and review requirements for AI and NAI  Differences on the basis of capacity and national circumstances  Capacity building required and key to enhanced transparency  Flexibility to be in-built to bridge the capacity gap  Can be introduced into scope, form, frequency and level of detail of reporting and scope, frequency and form of review Existing MRV Under UNFCCC: Key Highlights
  14. 14. What to report in the context of NDCs? Information:  Base year (Reference)  Target year  Target, including coverage and scope  Data, methodologies used  Means of implementation  Support (finance, technology, capacity building) 5 Year Cycle Submit NDCs Report Global Stocktake Progressive Revision of NDC Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016 Apples Vs Oranges
  15. 15. How to review in the context of NDCs?  Facilitative mutual consideration of progress on individual NDCs  Inputs to global stocktake on aggregate progress 5 Year Cycle Submit NDCs Report Global Stocktake Progressive Revision of NDC Breakout Group 5, CCXG Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change, 14 September 2016
  16. 16. 11:30 – 13:00 Breakout Group 5: Transparency of mitigation – providing flexibility in the enhanced transparency framework (Room CC 12) Focus The enhanced transparency framework under Article 13 is to have built-in flexibility which takes into account Parties’ different capacities and builds upon collective experience. This session will discuss the nature of this built-in flexibility, building on experience with reporting and review under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. Background documents “Enhancing the transparency of climate change mitigation under the Paris Agreement: lessons from existing arrangements” by Gregory Briner and Sara Moarif Co-facilitators • Gilberto Arias, Energeia Network • Harry Vreuls, Netherlands Speakers • Neha Pahuja, TERI [5-10 minutes] • Henrik Hallgrim Erikson, Norway [5-10 minutes] • Gao Xiang, Energy Research Institute, China [5-10 minutes] • Kazumasa Nagamori, Ministry of the Environment, Japan [5-10 minutes] Discussion questions 1. How can we provide flexibility in terms of scope, frequency and level of detail of reporting, while accommodating diverse country conditions and improving comparability among NDCs? 2. How can we provide flexibility in terms of the scope of technical review (e.g. desk reviews or in-country reviews) and multilateral consideration? 13:00 – 14:30 Lunch Organised in partnership with The Energy ResearchInstitute (TERI)

×