COP15 Climate Change Talks: No Agreement Yet

At the high level segment plenary at the COP15 Climate Change Talks in Copenhagen, the chair for the AWG-KP announces no agreement based upon numbers. So, at this stage of the Climate Change Talks there is still a low consensus on the key issues and, thus far, there is no amendment to the Koyoto Protocol. The COP/CMP 5 President is trying to set in motion dialogue with the Party heads of state on the issue. In addition, security is so tight that Party heads of state are having problems getting into the Plenary sessions. Several major groups put forth that the text is not yet in the form to be considered by the high level conference as suggested by the COP chair. They request that the political aspects be considered by the high level, but the technical aspects be sent back to the AWG-KP for further work for a period of one day. Yet there are other major groups that recommend that the political bargaining to take place. Rather that reconvene the AWG-KP, there can be informal discussions on some of the remaining issues.

The meeting was just suspended because the President of the COP resigned. She has been reassigned by the Foreign Minister as the special representative to conduct informal negotiations between the ministers of the Parties.

COP15 Climate Change Talks, Copenhagen: Two Treaties

We are now halfway through the second week of the COP15, climate change talks in Copenhagen. It appears that there is general acceptance that there will not be one treaty. Instead, the parties are working on two separate tracks, one under Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) and the other under Long Term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA). As a result, there are discussions of two separate treaties.

As one can well imagine, the negotiations are very tough at this stage. The ministers of the countries are arriving and now working in the negotiations. The negotiators must answer to their countries. And, the world expects results at COP15. There are strenuous objections to certain text to the proposed documents and also concessions so that no particular party is pictured as the one stalling the negotiations. The contact group chairs are working very hard to build the bridges necessary for consensus by the Parties to the text.

As I write, negotiations are underway for the contact group on other issues for the AWG-KP on further commitments for the Annex I Parties. The Parties are discussing greenhouse gases, sectors and source categories; common metrics to calculate the carbon dioxide equivalence of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks; and other methodological issues.

In the earlier session, the Draft decision -/CMP.5 for consideration of information on potential environmental, economic and social consequences, including spillover effects, of tools, policies and measures. This draft decision will now be sent to the Chair of the KP for consideration. This is one area where mediation can be used as a mechanism to resolve conflict under the potential consequences that will arise under the treaty and climate change from the local to international levels.

Promoting Mediation at Climate Change Talks, COP15

Mediator Mark Kirwin is helping promote mediation as a resolution mechanism for accord at the UNFCCC Climate Change Talks with Mediators Beyond Borders. As the reality of global warming and it's increasing impacts on food production, economies, poverty, human health and energy usage is becoming more widely understood, alternative dispute resolution tools such as mediation are important tools for peaceful resolution of climate change issues.



The climate change talks are progressing towards helping countries mitigate global warming and adapt to it's impacts peacefully. Mark will be attending the upcoming COP15 conference in Copenhagen, Denmark.

UNFCCC Climate Change Talks, Bangkok: Days 4 & 5

There appears to be movement backwards and forwards, coupled with frustration and peppered with optimism, as the negotiations continue in the open session Climate Change Treaty negotiations in Bangkok this week. The divide of ideals and political realities of the parties have become foundational, negotiated text statements.

This week's United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Climate Change Talks in Bangkok will determine the language in the COP15 Climate Change Treaty due to be ratified in Copenhagen this December. It will be the successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol, which expires 2012.

Below are some of my observations from the conference in Bangkok.

During negotiations on the Financial Resources Group, India questioned the private sector funding language because it would require the private sector to keep two sets of books, one for international scrutiny and the other for normal business. India advanced that the developing countries have their own domestic programs without MRVs (or Measurable, Reportable, Verifiable). It questioned as to what happens to the suggested national mitigation funding if significant amounts of funding come from the private sector for NAMAs (National Appropriate Mitigation Actions). Canada’s response was that there should not be a discussion of offsets in this session because it was being discussed in another room.

During discussions on the Enhanced Action on Adaptation and Associated Means of Implementation, Australia put forth that all Parties need to draw on a variety resources to achieve funding goals. There should be direct contribution in relation to capacity. South Africa responded that this is the heart of the discussion. South Africa voiced that there must be financial commitment by the developed countries. The South African delegates maintained that developing countries are already paying for their own adaptation which is holding back their goals of eradication of poverty and sustainable development. According to the Philippines, the resources must be predictable and delivered in a timely manner. The resources to the developing countries should be based in large part on grants. The cost of inaction is much greater than action.

The United States stated that there are few issues as important as finance. There needs to be an upscale of contribution. The results of climate change will result in a whole scale change in energy structures and economics. This cannot be done with just one small group of financial contributors. We need to bring all capacities to bear under the broadest interpretations. The new US administration intends to scale up contribution for adaptation. The private sector will provide mitigation opportunities. The parties must be flexible in the manner of contribution, maximizing resources. The US will not sign the treaty of there is an international tax included in the language. This sparked statements by many supporting the G77 and China’s position which looked for funding from developed countries.

During negotiations on the subgroup on mitigation under 1(b)(i) of the 2007 Bali Plan, Sweden advanced that we need a list of predictable targets and a list of NAMA’s. The US again voiced concern that we were not negotiating text that would end up in Copenhagen. Brazil, on behalf of the G77 and China, countered Australia’s proposal for a schedule of NAWA’s, because it weakens the commitments of the developed countries because it weakens the level of ambition and contribution to the global level of mitigation.

I was able to briefly talk with the US negotiation team regarding mediation proposals.

You can read a daily update about the progress of UNFCCC Climate Change Treaty negotiations in Bangkok on the COP15 web site.

UNFCCC Climate Change Talks, Bangkok: Day 3

Today is the third day of the UNFCCC Climate Change Talks in Bangkok, Thailand. One of the last open sessions yesterday, Day Two, concerned the Contact Group on Enhanced Action on the Provisions of Financial Resources and Investment. The session started with the delegates from Canada requesting simplification of the language. They asked that it not concentrate on the Principles in the FCCC/WGLCA/2009/INF.2 . This is the document that contains the revised negotiated text prepared by the facilitators during and after the informal UNFCCC Climate Change meetings of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention in Bonn August 2009.

Today it became apparent that the United States and Canada- and the EU to a certain extent- wanted to bypass the Principles of the Enhanced Action plan on Financial Resources and Investment and instead concentrate on specific language and action. They voiced concern that concentration on Principles took valuable time away from negotiations of substance. Further, as the United States stated, the guiding principles set forth in this section are already covered by the convention. The thinking was that simplicity equals clarity. The United States further indicated that simplicity helps in aiding and reaching agreement with divergent perspectives.

The United States offered that the whole section be deleted. This was in response to the Philippines on behalf of the G77 and China who thought that the principles were a good idea, presented its views on each paragraph of the proposed text. Many of the developing countries sided with the Philippines such as Bolivia and Egypt. Uganda’s response, on behalf of the Africa Group, was that the text was too long and it would be more effective to spend time discussing core issues. Uganda felt that if time was taken to discuss principles, there would not be enough time to discuss the real issues such as financing. Barbados, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, agreed with Uganda.

Later, at a dinner, regarding the Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change, I had informative discussions with delegates from the Philippines and Mali regarding the United States' position and the ratification possibilities by the United States Congress. There had also been discussions about the positive relationship of the delegates from the United States, Brazil, China and Indonesia regarding the United Nation's Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries Program (UN-REDD) issues.

Lastly, our thoughts go out to those in Samoa, the Philippines and Indonesia regarding the recent earthquakes and flooding tragedies as well as those who have suffered tragedy in Southeast Asia from the current typhoon.

UNFCCC Climate Change Talks, Bangkok: Day 2

We are winding up the second day of the UNFCCC Climate Change Talks in Bangkok, Thailand. The delegates here seem to be either representing governments with an intent of influencing proposed climate change treaty text negotiations or they are from NGOs that are intent on influencing the governments. The past two days have consisted of closed sessions for the national delegations, such as from the G77, China, Africa, the EU, the Island States etc., and open sessions for general text negotiations. We have been attending the open sessions. Today, we attended sessions regarding Adaptation, Capacity Building and Mitigation as well as the Regional Briefing by the United Nations System Organizations on Climate Change Programmes in the Asia and Pacific Region.

The Regional Briefing was chaired and monitored by the Executive Secretary to the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). The panel consisted of representatives from United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Asian Development Bank (ADB), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and ESCAP. In addition to discussing their programs, the panel was faced with difficult questions from the audience as to how various policies and procedures were being implemented by these organizations. There were questions such as: How to transition to a green economy? How to benefit the local populations? How are these programs benefiting children? How do these programs benefit the farmers who are facing increased difficulties as a result of extreme weather events cause by climate change? Why do the students in school in the developing nations not feel the effects of the project outcomes from these programs?

The proposed climate change treaty text negotiation open sessions were attended by the Parties and conducted by chosen chairpersons who facilitated discussions on certain proposed consolidated text that was discussed at the Bonn Climate Change Talks in August. However, as one Chair stated, the discussions were more about positions than actual content. During the sessions, each delegation’s chosen speaker put forth their positions on the proposed text, often combined with general statements supporting the delegation’s policy positions.

The Adaptation and Capacity Building sessions focused on different views regarding whether to focus on the guiding principles or implementation. The session on the mitigation portion of the proposed climate change treaty text regarding the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD) program was directed at discussions of substance. For instance, India did not think that the paragraphs in question regarding scope could be discussed without first defining the proposed term “REDD plus actions.”

REDD, or Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries, is an effort to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development.

Brazil led the counter to India by saying the Parties should not get bogged down with a "REDD plus" definition because it was adequately defined in the United Nations Climate Change Conference of 2007's Bali Action Plan. Brazil was supported by the United States and the European Union. Norway indicated that "REDD plus" was a results-based mechanism through Measurable, Reportable and Verifiable actions which are a part of National Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA) for developing countries as mentioned in the Bali Action Plan. Thailand and other forest rich countries responded that for "REDD plus" to be a part of NAMA, there needs to be a definition for NAMA and clarification of "REDD plus". Tanzania wanted to make sure that the human rights of indigenous peoples were adequately addressed in the REDD discussions. Japan stressed that the REDD language was necessary to secure environmental stability.

Today I gave Mediators Beyond Border's Supporting Statement on the Importance of Mediation to Climate Change to the Parties. I had brief discussions with several party and NGO representatives about mediation during breaks and before and after the conference. The delegates I have spoken have indicated that they consider mediation to be a good option in resolving climate change disputes.

UNFCCC Climate Change Talks, Bangkok, Sept. 28 - Oct. 1

This week, as part of my work as the Asian Coordinator and as a member of the COP15 Coordination team for Mediators Beyond Borders, I will be at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Climate Change Talks in Bangkok for the COP15 Treaty. We will discuss using mediation as a means for peaceful resolution in climate change disputes as well as adding language to that effect in the upcoming climate change treaty that is now being drafted. The new climate change treaty, COP15, will replace the Kyoto Protocol treaty. The convention is being held at the United Nations Conference Center in Bangkok September 28th through October 9, 2009.


"This is the penultimate negotiating session before COP 15 in Copenhagen in December, at which an ambitious and effective international climate change deal is to be clinched, " according to today's announcement on the UNFCCC web site.

The Kyoto Protocol sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These amount to an average of five per cent against 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008-2012.

The Kyoto Protocol as explained by the UNFCCC:

"Under the Treaty, countries must meet their targets primarily through internal national measures. However, the Kyoto Protocol offers them an additional means of meeting their targets by way of three market-based mechanisms:

• Emissions trading – known as 'the carbon market'
• Clean development mechanism (CDM)
• Joint implementation (JI).

"The mechanisms help stimulate green investment and help the nations meet their emission targets in a cost-effective way."