1. CLIMATE NEGOT I AT I O NS C A NC U N, M E X I CO NOV- D EC 2 0 1 0 N G O NE WSLET TER
1
DECEMBER
RIVIERA MAYA
ISSUE
ECO has been published by Non-Governmental Environmental Groups at major international conferences since the Stockholm Environment
Conference in 1972. ECO is produced co-operatively by the Climate Action Network at the UNFCCC meetings in Cancun in November-December 2010.
ECO email: eco@sunlightdata.com – ECO website: http://climatenetwork.org/eco-newsletters – Editorial/Production: Fred Heutte
Vulnerability is Not a Beauty Contest LULUCF: Moment
of Decision
In recent UNFCCC sessions some develop- AFB itself to address this issue by provid-
ing countries that are not small island states, ing options by COP17 next year. The AFB, The future of Annex I forests and their role in
LDCs or African countries have challenged which meets in Cancun immediately after climate change mitigation is about to be de-
the Bali Action Plan language specifying COP 16, can in turn solicit expert advice and cided here in Cancun.
those three groups of countries as being par- report back to the COP next year with its rec- ECO has long highlighted how inappro-
ticularly vulnerable. This has led to an un- ommendations. Alternatively, the LCA could priate and possibly fraudulent LULUCF
helpful contest within the Group of 77 and allocate more time over this coming year to accounting rules could be used by Annex I
China. ECO believes that with increasing develop thinking on these issues than has Parties to avoid accounting for their forestry
impacts of climate change around the world, been possible thus far, taking into account emissions. This week a group of NGOs as-
such as the devastating floods in Pakistan ear- the knowledge and experience of the AFB. sessed the scale of these impacts, in particu-
lier this year, it is undeniable that all coun- Furthermore, ECO encourages BASIC coun- lar, the magnitude of proposed forest man-
tries are now vulnerable, even developed tries and others to come forward and voice agement baselines relative to the ambition
countries. their support for prioritisation of funding to of Parties’ pledges. Astonishingly, the emis-
However, in the context of the UNFCCC the most vulnerable countries, such as LDCs, sion reduction efforts of some Parties could
process it is not helpful to compete on which SIDS and African countries – indeed, the def- be reduced by up to 66% as a consequence
country is more vulnerable than another. In- inition in the Bali Action Plan. of unaccounted emissions from logging their
stead, the focus should be more explicit and forests.
open about the main issue which is how to There is still more than one proposal on the
allocate the currently very limited adaptation CAN-Europe Side Event table, and it is clear that the impact of for-
funds across different countries, with a view EU climate financing: est management accounting on countries’
to the urgency of their situations. NGO analysis and recommendations pledges will differ depending on the approach
ECO urges Parties to discuss the possible agreed upon.
elements of an adaptation resource allocation • Has the EU kept its FSF promises? A review process was proposed by devel-
framework that takes the impacts of increased oping countries earlier this year to evaluate
• What did you think of the EU’s pres-
climate vulnerability into account along with the robustness of favoured baseline propos-
entation of its fast start finance report
other relevant attributes such as poverty and als by Annex I countries. The new KP Chair’s
• yesterday?
gender. text calls on Parties to provide the required
We believe that this discussion needs to be • Is the EU living up to its commit-
information by February 2011 and for expert
held primarily among the developing coun- ments? How can it do better?
reviewers to conclude their review by May.
tries and a smaller group should be mandat- CAN-Europe warmly invites you to a dis-
But let’s be clear. The impact of the pro-
ed to work further on this issue. This group cussion with high level speakers from the posed reference levels is unacceptable and a
should include representatives from LDCs, EU and two developing countries, and a review won’t fix that. However, broadening
SIDS and African countries, as well as others. presentation of NGO recommendations the review to include an objective analysis
Such a representative body already exists in for further improvement. of all accounting options could help Parties
the Adaptation Fund Board with its 32 mem- make an informed decision about which ap-
bers including representatives from all UN Room Monarca, Cancun Messe proach should be used in the second commit-
country groupings. Wednesday 2 December
We suggest that parties could mandate the 16.45-18.15 – LULUCF, continued on page 2
ISSUE NO 3 VOLUME CXXVII FREE OF CHARGE

2. CLIMATE NEGOT I AT I O NS C A NC U N, M E X I CO N OV- D EC 2 0 1 0 NG O NE WSLET TER
– LULUCF, continued from page 1
High Time for
Emission
ment period. To do this, Parties would need Party Reduction Unaccounted
Pledge % Logging
Bold Moves to provide information about each of the po-
tential options on the table and how it will
2020 Emissions %
on Legal Form impact their pledges. New Zealand -10 to -20 +66.0
This analysis is urgently required for a Norway -30 to -40 +8.7
Today, Parties are expected to consider meaningful discussion on numbers. That will Russian Fed -15 to -25 +5.5
achieve two crucial things: the discussion of
the numerous proposals for a new legally Australia -5 to -15 +4.0
‘numbers’ will go forward with consideration
binding instrument under the Convention of all potential options, and decisions will be Japan -25 +3.6
as well as proposed amendments to the made based on the likely real impacts on the EU -20 to -30 +2.7
Kyoto Protocol in the COP and CMP Ple- climate.
Switzerland -20 to -30 +2.4
naries, respectively.
ECO remembers that last year this dis- Canada -17 +1.4
cussion caused quite a fuss. In the end,
the consideration of legal form was rel- Japan: No to Kyoto Notes: Figures are percentages of country-
egated to informal consultations on the Under Any Circumstances specific base years. Pledged emission
reductions for 2020 (rel 1990) from FCCC/
basis that Parties had not had sufficient
time to consider proposals and . . . well, KP/AWG/2010/INF.2/Rev.1. Unaccounted
When leadership was needed most, the home logging emissions equals the difference
we all know how Copenhagen ended. country of the Kyoto Protocol made a de- between Party’s proposed reference levels
Now Parties have had a full year to structive statement in the KP plenary. It re- and average of historical net emissions. The
consider the proposals that have been ta- jected a second commitment period of the estimate of average historical net emissions
bled – a year when the impacts of climate Kyoto Protocol by saying ‘Japan will not from Annex I forest management calculated
change over and over again made them- inscribe its target under the KP on any condi- using data from 1990-2008 (forest land
selves apparent with Pakistani floods, tions or under any circumstances’. remaining forest land) from Parties’ 2010
Russian forest fires, Chinese landslides, ‘Preferring’ a single-treaty approach is one inventory submissions. Any adjustments
and Caribbean islands inundated by hur- thing, but aggressively denying the future of were made on consultation with Parties and
ricanes. Kyoto is quite another. The statement upset technical experts. Japan has not yet indi-
It’s high time to get serious about cli- cated whether its pledges include account-
many Parties and created an unconstructive
mate change action and discuss these ing for forest management.
atmosphere.
proposals in an open and transparent This COP was supposed to be the place to
manner. rebuild trust among parties, but Japan’s move Cancun Personals
ANNEX 1 COUNTRY SEEKING
Parties should establish a Contact not only could degrade trust but even poten-
TREATY FOR NO-STRINGS ATTACHED
Group to do so rather than putting the
HOLIDAY ROMANCE IN MEXICO.
tially wreck the negotiations.
issue to bed again (as they did in Copen- At a time when the world is seeking to
hagen) by referring it to informal consul-
Currently struggling with a 13-year
strengthen the climate regime, Japan’s hard
tations.
relationship, just looking for a good
stance, in the guise of getting the US and
time in the Cancun sun.
While ECO is painfully aware that Par- China to make mitigation commitments, risks
Likes: excellent food, movies, comic
ties will not be concluding a fair, ambi- leaving us with no deal at all.
books, robots and big industry.
tious and legally binding deal to save A large majority of Parties have said they
Dislikes: commitment, cooperation,
the planet here in Cancun, it’s time to want a legally binding outcome. It’s time
compliance, science and targets.
reaffirm that this is what we are aiming they hold firm to the legally binding treaty
for. that was so hard-won in those late nights in
If interested please email:
Moving toward deciding on the legal Kyoto. Japan should honour the basic frame-
scared_of_commitment@awg.kp
form is possible, necessary and will en- work that all countries agreed in Bali, which
able more effective negotiations in the is for developed country Parties to continue
lead up to South Africa. their mitigation obligations under the KP, for
Last year, ECO headlined Tuvalu’s in- a legally binding agreement under the LCA
sistence on a legal form Contact Group as
‘A Bold Move in Darker Times’.
track to include comparable efforts for the Fossil of the Day
US, and for the developing countries to un-
We would really love to have a headline dertake nationally appropriate mitigation ac-
here in Cancun saying, ‘A Bold Move By #1 - Japan
tions that are supported by finance, technol-
All Parties in Sunnier Times’. For announcing it will not inscribe
ogy and capacity building.
And delegates, if you’re up for it, you Does Japan really want to be known for the
its target in a second commitment
can make the first bold move forward burial of the Protocol that was born in one of period of the Kyoto Protocol under
right here, right now. its beautiful cities? any conditions or circumstances.
ISSUE NO 3 VOLUME CXXVII FREE OF CHARGE